(2013/07/18 4:19), Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 07/16, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> >> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 20:57 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: >>> trace_array_get() goes away. NOTE! this is actually wrong until we >>> change instance_delete() path to nullify ->i_private. >> >> I think this needs to be done first. > > Do you mean "change instance_delete() path to nullify ->i_private" ? > > Yes. Well yes and no, afaics, but please ignore. Of course, I won't > send the patches with the holes which I knew about. > > Once again, this is just RFC to know your and Masami's opinion. If > you think this can work, I'll try to resend this series with the > additional bits to cover instance_delete() too. _Afaics_ this needs > some temporary uglifications "in between".
I think your proposal goes a good direction, but it also requires completeness, because, as I pointed, we have to take care of all operations are correctly checked except for open/close. So, I agree with Steven, I'd like to see a complete patchset. Thank you, -- Masami HIRAMATSU IT Management Research Dept. Linux Technology Center Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory E-mail: [email protected] -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
