From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [GIT] Networking Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2018 11:29:40 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20180702.220348.527254946062449999.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: Andrew Morton , Network Development , Linux Kernel Mailing List To: David Miller , Ursula Braun Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180702.220348.527254946062449999.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 6:03 AM David Miller wrote: > > are available in the Git repository at: > > gitolite@ra.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net.git So the af_smc poll fixes clashed with the revert of the commit that caused those fixed to be done in the first place. See the changes to net/smc/af_smc.c in my commit a11e1d432b51 ("Revert changes to convert to ->poll_mask() and aio IOCB_CMD_POLL") vs Ursula's 24ac3a08e658 ("net/smc: rebuild nonblocking connect") I (briefly) considered just dropping Ursula's changes entirely, but they looked like a nice cleanup on their own, so what I did instead was to try to fix up my revert instead. That involved removing the release_sock/lock_sock pair around the ->poll() call, and removing the special "sock_poll_wait()" that got re-introduced by my revert, but that Ursula's changes seem to obviate. However, while I can look at the code and say "my merge makes sense to me", (a) I can't test it, (b) I don't actually know the rules for SMC sockets in the first place, and (c) I may be just incompetent. So Ursula - mind checking and testing the end result? I _think_ it's fine and the merge looked pretty obvious, but maybe af_smc got broken again. [ It's still going through by basic build tests, so I haven't pushed out my merge yet, but it should be in the usual places in a short while ] Thanks, Linus