On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, John McCutchan wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 06:06:56PM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, John McCutchan wrote:
> > > On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, John McCutchan wrote:
> > > > Nice work, I am going to have a closer look at the patch soon. Could you
> > > > post
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 06:06:56PM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, John McCutchan wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 08:56:15AM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > > On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, John McCutchan wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 20:09 +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, John McCutchan wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 08:56:15AM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, John McCutchan wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 20:09 +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, Daniel Drake wrote:
> > > > > Anton Altaparmak
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 08:56:15AM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, John McCutchan wrote:
> > On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 20:09 +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > > On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, Daniel Drake wrote:
> > > > Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > > > > )-: I have addressed the only t
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, John McCutchan wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 20:09 +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, Daniel Drake wrote:
> > > Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > > > )-: I have addressed the only things I can think off that could cause
> > > > the oops and below is the resul
On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 20:09 +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, Daniel Drake wrote:
> > Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > > )-: I have addressed the only things I can think off that could cause
> > > the oops and below is the resulting patch. Could you please test it?
> >
> > Yeah
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, Daniel Drake wrote:
> Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > )-: I have addressed the only things I can think off that could cause
> > the oops and below is the resulting patch. Could you please test it?
>
> Yeah!! After removing I_WILL_FREE stuff, that fixed both the oops *and* the
>
Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> )-: I have addressed the only things I can think off that could cause
> the oops and below is the resulting patch. Could you please test it?
Yeah!! After removing I_WILL_FREE stuff, that fixed both the oops *and* the
hang. Everything works nicely now.
Thanks a millio
Gautam,
On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 11:55 -0400, Gautam Singaraju wrote:
> I had used the 2.6.12 kernel with the latest Inotify. There was no
> "I_WILL_FREE" in the any place. And, there was no problem in compilation.
Er, yes, obviously. You are not using my patch on top of inotify and
original inotif
ks,
Gautam Singaraju
SIS Dept., UNC Charlotte
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anton Altaparmakov
Sent: Monday, July 04, 2005 11:12 AM
To: Daniel Drake
Cc: David Gómez; Robert Love; John McCutchan; Linux-kernel
Subject: Re: Problem with inoti
On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 15:39 +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 15:27 +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > On Sun, 2005-07-03 at 11:34 +0100, Daniel Drake wrote:
> > > I reverted the patch you sent earlier
> > > (inotify_unmount_inodes-list-iteration-fix.diff) and applied the o
On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 15:27 +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-07-03 at 11:34 +0100, Daniel Drake wrote:
> > I reverted the patch you sent earlier
> > (inotify_unmount_inodes-list-iteration-fix.diff) and applied the one you
> > attached here (inotify_unmount_inodes-list-iteration-fix2.
On Sun, 2005-07-03 at 11:34 +0100, Daniel Drake wrote:
> I reverted the patch you sent earlier
> (inotify_unmount_inodes-list-iteration-fix.diff) and applied the one you
> attached here (inotify_unmount_inodes-list-iteration-fix2.diff).
>
> The good news is that the hang is gone. The bad news is t
13 matches
Mail list logo
