From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arndbergmann@googlemail.com>
Cc: John Kacur <jkacur@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sony_pi: Remove the BKL from sonypi_misc_open
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 23:31:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091021213139.GC4880@nowhere> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200910200008.57468.arnd@arndb.de>
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 12:08:57AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 October 2009, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Monday 19 October 2009, John Kacur wrote:
> > > How does this look? (Version 2 of the patch follows)
> >
> > Looks good now.
> >
>
> A bit of background:
>
> Doing only one of the two conversions is a correct patch as well
> of course, I just want to make sure you don't have to go through all
> the same files again once someone does a blind pushdown into the ioctl
> and llseek functions, so once you prove that a specific driver doesn't
> need the BKL, please always make sure to remove it from all three places.
>
> I fear that the llseek part will get interesting as well, just because
> we call default_llseek instead of no_ll by default currently.
> It might be a good idea to add one of .llseek=no_llseek or
> .llseek=generic_file_llseek in any file_operations that you prove
> to not require the BKL.
>
> Arnd <><
What about a pusdown of default_lseek attribution for these
fops that don't have any llseek() (and rename it to
deprecated_default_lseek() )
Because we can probably fix these fops one by one but what
about the next drivers that will have no llseek() ?
We can't attribute default_llseek() by default anymore for
further fops that are to come.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-21 21:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-18 21:54 [PATCH] sony_pi: Remove the BKL from sonypi_misc_open John Kacur
2009-10-19 4:19 ` Arnd Bergmann
2009-10-19 18:20 ` John Kacur
2009-10-19 22:00 ` Arnd Bergmann
2009-10-19 22:08 ` Arnd Bergmann
2009-10-21 0:06 ` John Kacur
2009-10-21 8:29 ` Arnd Bergmann
2009-10-21 10:27 ` John Kacur
2009-10-21 13:16 ` Arnd Bergmann
2009-10-22 2:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-10-21 21:31 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2009-10-21 21:41 ` John Kacur
2009-10-21 21:55 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-10-21 22:06 ` John Kacur
2009-10-21 22:27 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-10-22 2:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-10-22 13:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
2009-10-25 7:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-10-19 22:30 ` Mattia Dongili
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20091021213139.GC4880@nowhere \
--to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=arndbergmann@googlemail.com \
--cc=jkacur@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox