From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 16:39:07 +0530 From: Dipankar Sarma Subject: Re: 2.5.69-mm1 Message-ID: <20030506110907.GB9875@in.ibm.com> Reply-To: dipankar@in.ibm.com References: <20030504231650.75881288.akpm@digeo.com> <20030505210151.GO8978@holomorphy.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030505210151.GO8978@holomorphy.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: William Lee Irwin III , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, May 05, 2003 at 09:09:34PM +0000, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > On Sun, May 04, 2003 at 11:16:50PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.5/2.5.69/2.5.69-mm1/ > > Various random fixups, cleanps and speedups. Mainly a resync to 2.5.69. > > fs/file_table.c: In function `fget_light': > fs/file_table.c:209: warning: passing arg 1 of `_raw_read_lock' from incompatible pointer type I should have merged with 2.5.69 before mailing my fget-speedup patch out. ->file_lock has been changed to a spin_lock somewhere after 2.5.66. That brings me to the point - with the fget-speedup patch, we should probably change ->file_lock back to an rwlock again. We now take this lock only when fd table is shared and under such situation the rwlock should help. Andrew, it that ok ? Thanks Dipankar -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: aart@kvack.org