From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.186]:64849 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751987Ab0EAKr7 (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 May 2010 06:47:59 -0400 From: Arnd Bergmann To: Hans Verkuil Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Pushdown bkl from v4l ioctls Date: Sat, 1 May 2010 12:47:44 +0200 Cc: Laurent Pinchart , Frederic Weisbecker , LKML , John Kacur , Linus Torvalds , Jan Blunck , Thomas Gleixner , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Greg KH , Linux Media Mailing List References: <201004290910.43412.laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> <201005011155.37057.hverkuil@xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: <201005011155.37057.hverkuil@xs4all.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-6" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201005011247.45273.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Saturday 01 May 2010 11:55:37 Hans Verkuil wrote: > However, I do think it would be better to > create a video_ioctl2_bkl rather than add a video_ioctl2_unlocked. The current > video_ioctl2 function is already unlocked. So you are subtle changing the > behavior of video_ioctl2. Not a good idea IMHO. And yes, grepping for > video_ioctl2_bkl is also easy to do and makes it more obvious that the BKL is > used in drivers that call this. Yes, that makes sense. It also allows working towards a goal of 'removing video_ioctl2_bkl', which is easier to understand than 'converting video_ioctl2 users to video_ioctl2_unlocked and later renaming that'. Arnd