[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080109224603.GH15612@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 23:46:03 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>, Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
Paolo Ciarrocchi <paolo.ciarrocchi@...il.com>,
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
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 10:40:26PM +0000, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 02:12:40PM -0600, Matt Mackall wrote:
> > You'll need to change the prototype, the unlocked version doesn't take
> > an inode. And you'll need to make sure that nothing in the function uses
> > the inode, which I think Andi forgot to mention.
>
> This old chestnut again. Perhaps we could have inode passed to unlocked_ioctl?
> I never understood why it wasn't there in the first place if the plan was for
> .unlocked_ioctl to supercede .ioctl whenever possible.
If you still need inode use
struct inode *inode = file->f_dentry->d_inode;
-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