Re: [JANITOR PROPOSAL] Switch ioctl functions to ->unlocked_ioctl

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...>, <kernel-janitors@...>, <paolo.ciarrocchi@...>, <gorcunov@...>, <jgarzik@...>, <linux-ide@...>
Date: Tuesday, January 8, 2008 - 7:50 pm

Andi Kleen wrote:
<snip>

I notice that every driver in drivers/ata uses a .ioctl that points to
ata_scsi_ioctl().  I could add the BKL to that function, and then change
all of the drivers to .unlocked_ioctl, but I assume this would be a
candidate to actually clean up by determining why the lock is needed and
removing it if necessary.  Does anyone know off-hand the reason for
needing the lock (I assume someone does or it wouldn't have survived
this long)?  If the lock is absolutely required, then I can write the
patch to add lock_kernel() and unlock_kernel().

-- 
Kevin Winchester

--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [JANITOR PROPOSAL] Switch ioctl functions to ->unlock..., Kevin Winchester, (Tue Jan 8, 7:50 pm)
Re: [JANITOR PROPOSAL] Switch ioctl functions to -&gt;unlock..., Alasdair G Kergon, (Thu Jan 10, 7:39 am)
Re: [JANITOR PROPOSAL] Switch ioctl functions to -&gt;unlock..., Christoph Hellwig, (Thu Jan 10, 4:34 am)