Re: [RFC vfs/for-next 0/1] Only set epoll timeout if it's in the future

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Joe Damato <jdamato@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [RFC vfs/for-next 0/1] Only set epoll timeout if it's in the future
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 16:23:24 +0200
Cc: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Alexander Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>, open list <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20250415184346.39229-1-jdamato@fastly.com>

On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 06:43:45PM +0000, Joe Damato wrote:
> Greetings:
> 
> Sending as an RFC against vfs/for-next because I am not sure which
> branch to send this against.
> 
> It's possible this should be against vfs.fixes with a Fixes

Yes, can you resend against vfs.fixes, please? :)

References:
- [RFC vfs/for-next 0/1] Only set epoll timeout if it's in the future
  - From: Joe Damato

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/3] inode: add fastpath for filesystem user namespace retrieval
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH RFC 3/3] mnt_idmapping: inline all low-level helpers
Previous by thread: Re: [RFC vfs/for-next 1/1] eventpoll: Set epoll timeout if it's in the future
Next by thread: [regression 6.1.y] Regression from 476c1dfefab8 ("mm: Don't pin ZERO_PAGE in pin_user_pages()") with pci-passthrough for both KVM VMs and booting in xen DomU
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux Ext4 Filesystem] [Union Filesystem] [Filesystem Testing] [Ceph Users] [Ecryptfs] [NTFS 3] [AutoFS] [Kernel Newbies] [Share Photos] [Security] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux Cachefs] [Reiser Filesystem] [Linux RAID] [NTFS 3] [Samba] [Device Mapper] [CEPH Development]

Powered by Linux