From: Al Viro on 24 Mar 2010 05:30 On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 04:12:23PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > > Two patches. > > The second removes S_BIAS which is unnecessary and so potentially > confusing. > > The first I found the need for while preparing the second patch. It > seems that get_active_super doesn't follow the pattern of all other > code that walks the super_blocks list. See #untested in vfs tree... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Neil Brown on 24 Mar 2010 06:00 On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 09:20:11 +0000 Al Viro <viro(a)ZenIV.linux.org.uk> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 04:12:23PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > > > > Two patches. > > > > The second removes S_BIAS which is unnecessary and so potentially > > confusing. > > > > The first I found the need for while preparing the second patch. It > > seems that get_active_super doesn't follow the pattern of all other > > code that walks the super_blocks list. > > See #untested in vfs tree... > Ahhh, I see I've been beaten to it by 2 days... I should have posted that patch months ago :-) Thanks anyway. NeilBrown -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|
Pages: 1 Prev: [PATCH] hwmon: f71882fg: code cleanup Next: musb: potential use after free |