[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200801171318.57491.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 13:18:56 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Mathieu SEGAUD <mathieu.segaud@...ala.cx>
Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, sct@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Convert EXT2 to use unlocked_ioctl
On Thursday 17 January 2008, Mathieu SEGAUD wrote:
> yep, they do. I noticed this nested calls. I guess I will add
> _extX_compat_ioctl() running with no BKL's which would be used by both
> extX_ioctl() and extX_compat_ioctl().
> Any comments on such a strategy ? thanks a lot for the reminder :)
>
Why not just kill the lock_kernel() in extX_compat_ioctl()?
Arnd <><
--
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