[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080109000358.GF2117@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 01:03:58 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Paolo Ciarrocchi <paolo.ciarrocchi@...il.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, gorcunov@...il.com
Subject: Re: [JANITOR PROPOSAL] Switch ioctl functions to ->unlocked_ioctl II
> paolo@...lo-desktop:~/linux-2.6/mm$ grep "struct file_operations" *
> shmem.c:static const struct file_operations shmem_file_operations;
> shmem.c:static const struct file_operations shmem_file_operations = {
> swapfile.c:static const struct file_operations proc_swaps_operations = {
>
> Am I right in saying that both the files don't need to be modified?
If they don't have an ioctl handler they don't need to be modified, correct.
>
> There is nothing like:
> struct file_operations xyz_ops = {
> ...
> .ioctl = xyz_ioctl
> };
>
> in there.
>
> So I guess I need a smarter trick to find out which files need to be modified
> as you previously suggested.
grep -P '\.ioctl.*=' $(grep -rl 'struct file_operations' * )
should work. There are also special multiline greps iirc that might also be able
to do this better (like sgrep)
-Andi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists