Re: [PATCH] f_op->poll() without lock_kernel()

From: David S. Miller (davem@redhat.com)
Date: Fri Apr 21 2000 - 18:44:56 EDT

Next message: Ron Gage: "Re: I-Iopener/VIA Chipset problems - anyone working on this?"

Previous message: Alan Cox: "Re: I-Iopener/VIA Chipset problems - anyone working on this?"
In reply to: Alexander Viro: "Re: [PATCH] f_op->poll() without lock_kernel()"
Next in thread: Alexander Viro: "Re: [PATCH] f_op->poll() without lock_kernel()"
Next in thread: Dunlap, Randy: "RE: [PATCH] f_op->poll() without lock_kernel()"
Reply: Alexander Viro: "Re: [PATCH] f_op->poll() without lock_kernel()"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 18:13:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu>

   BTW, IWBNI the same would be done for proto/proto_ops. Dave, would
   you accept the net/*/* side of such patch? I can send it in an hour
   or so.

I highly approve of this, please just do it.

Later,
David S. Miller
davem@redhat.com

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Ron Gage: "Re: I-Iopener/VIA Chipset problems - anyone working on this?"
Previous message: Alan Cox: "Re: I-Iopener/VIA Chipset problems - anyone working on this?"
In reply to: Alexander Viro: "Re: [PATCH] f_op->poll() without lock_kernel()"
Next in thread: Alexander Viro: "Re: [PATCH] f_op->poll() without lock_kernel()"
Next in thread: Dunlap, Randy: "RE: [PATCH] f_op->poll() without lock_kernel()"
Reply: Alexander Viro: "Re: [PATCH] f_op->poll() without lock_kernel()"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 21 2000 - 19:03:06 EDT