Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the vfs tree

From: Nathan Zimmer <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 10:43:06 -0500

On 04/04/2013 03:02 AM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 11:56:34PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Thu, 4 Apr 2013 17:26:48 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>
>>> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in
>>> fs/proc/generic.c between several commits from the vfs tree and commit
>>> "procfs: improve scaling in proc" from the akpm tree.
>>>
>>> I just dropped the akpm tree patch (and the following
>>> "procfs-improve-scaling-in-proc-v5") as the conflicts are a bit complex.
>> Well perhaps the vfs tree should start paying some attention to the
>> rest of the world, particularly after -rc5.
> I'm sorry, but... not in this case.  There are seriously nasty races around
> remove_proc_entry()/proc_reg_release() and the whole area needs a rewrite.
> Tentative fix is in vfs.git#experimental; I hadn't pushed it into #for-next
> yet, but Nathan's patches are definitely going to buggered by any realistic
> solution.
In this case I will resubmit my first patch for moving the kfree in 
proc_reg_release.