Re: [PATCH, RFC] Remove fasync() BKL usage, take 3325

Jonathan Corbet
2009-01-23T06:02:05Z

On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 06:54:04 +0100
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:

> The state needs to be protected while the per driver ->fasync callback
> runs, otherwise the bit can get out of sync with what the driver
> thinks it is.
>
> Mind you imho the best way would be to move the bit manipulation for
> that into the drivers, but that would require to change them all.

You know, I'm not sure why I didn't look into that. Do we want drivers
reaching directly into struct file and making changes? Maybe a helper
would be better. Hmm, maybe we could call it fasync_helper() and it
could just do the right thing? Will investigate further...

jon