From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752464Ab0C3Guq (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Mar 2010 02:50:46 -0400 Received: from mail-bw0-f209.google.com ([209.85.218.209]:61511 "EHLO mail-bw0-f209.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750902Ab0C3Guo (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Mar 2010 02:50:44 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; b=RH6es/K6Jmjq8p9Zq8NKnKZM4HfOT8GRblSwnQOjMF4a5s1ngegKnd/uP2Mt4FTYot TnF7iZU5rV/WnGTCIr/swVewPEO9GEb0vlE/2WnrE/5zt3DVkHlH+m5kFb+aZ4O78P5g vLzMRyCVCKFK1xjrh/ZV0GdgZjdAXwCYv2KiY= Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 08:50:48 +0200 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Alexey Dobriyan Cc: LKML , Arnd Bergmann , Thomas Gleixner , Andrew Morton , John Kacur , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Al Viro , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] procfs: Kill BKL in llseek on proc base Message-ID: <20100330065046.GA22419@nowhere> References: <1269930015-863-1-git-send-regression-fweisbec@gmail.com> <1269930015-863-2-git-send-regression-fweisbec@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 09:40:24AM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > --- a/fs/proc/base.c > > +++ b/fs/proc/base.c > > @@ -728,6 +728,7 @@ out_no_task: > > > >  static const struct file_operations proc_info_file_operations = { > >        .read           = proc_info_read, > > +       .llseek         = generic_file_llseek, > > There is no warning for default default_llseek case. > This should be done same way as proc ioctls. I don't think we should. We have overriden the llseek for the procfs users located in the proc core (just fs/proc) but we haven't touched all of the external users, and since there are hundreds of them, I guess a lot don't implement llseek. We would need to first override those that are visible upstream and warn for the further ones after this step only.