From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] Remove fasync() BKL usage, take 3325 Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:36:18 -0500 Message-ID: <20090128173618.GA3174@infradead.org> References: <20090115153211.663df310@bike.lwn.net> <20090122065104.2787df2d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090122203248.GA20159@infradead.org> <20090123045646.GK15750@one.firstfloor.org> <20090127165504.53ed7a2d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090128031439.GA11025@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090128031439.GA11025-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Oleg Nesterov Cc: Andrew Morton , Andi Kleen , hch-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org, corbet-T1hC0tSOHrs@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, viro-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org, linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, alan-qBU/x9rampVanCEyBjwyrvXRex20P6io@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 04:14:39AM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > I didn't send the actual patch. The idea is, > > can't we use O_LOCK_FLAGS bit? I agree, it is a bit ugly, > and I won't insist if you don't like is. > > static inline int try_lock_f_flags(struct file *file) > { > return !test_and_set_bit(O_LOCK_FLAGS, file->f_flags); > } ->f_flags is an unsigned int and the bit macros need an unsigned long. Increasing the size of struct file for this is probably a bad idea. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html