From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757300Ab0CaWUm (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Mar 2010 18:20:42 -0400 Received: from mail-pv0-f174.google.com ([74.125.83.174]:51044 "EHLO mail-pv0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756505Ab0CaWUl (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Mar 2010 18:20:41 -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:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=sBTaS9LYjiFrRCeWf001s7OG8p2J76QokjNEtd/A1Sv33g/fKr+fW9ovT55fKgZpmD U6OkLllHxDKVvdVwEFV7fOwpM2CABePtiZfNq6s3rd2kzjGWkSK1yo/dtUil5N9w0ohO 9S+P+d+B/mMzAjZtt8+8Gi1Ln8+c6iQAbweVc= Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 00:20:41 +0200 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Roland Dreier Cc: Arnd Bergmann , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox , Thomas Gleixner , jblunck@suse.de, Alan Cox , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [GIT, RFC] Killing the Big Kernel Lock Message-ID: <20100331222040.GG5163@nowhere> References: <201003242240.54907.arnd@arndb.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline 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 Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 03:11:03PM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote: > Hi Arnd, > > Looking at your tree, I see you have commit 753dd249 ("perf_event: use > nonseekable_open") that does: > > > --- a/kernel/perf_event.c > > +++ b/kernel/perf_event.c > > @@ -2515,6 +2515,8 @@ static int perf_fasync(int fd, struct file *filp, int on) > > } > > > > static const struct file_operations perf_fops = { > > + .open = nonseekable_open, > > + .llseek = no_llseek, > > .release = perf_release, > > .read = perf_read, > > .poll = perf_poll, > > But if I understand this correctly, the assignment to .open is at best > useless -- these file_operations are only used via anon_inode_getfd() > and so there is no possible path that can call the .open method. Or am > I missing something? > > (The same applies to the kvm_main.c changes too) Good point, I'll update that. Thanks.