[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080415221707.82da3d42.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 22:17:07 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Thiago Galesi <thiagogalesi@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fbdev-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH] fb: Remove use of lock_kernel /
unlock_kernel in fbmem
On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 11:50:07 -0300 Thiago Galesi <thiagogalesi@...il.com> wrote:
> This patch removes lock_kernel(), unlock_kernel() usage in fbmem.c and replaces it with a mutex
It isn't that simple, alas.
vfs_ioctl() runs lock_kernel() prior to calling fb_ioctl(), so the
lock_kernel()s in fb_compat_ioctl() are actually providing exclusion against
fb_ioctl(). Your patch would break that.
A suitable fix might be to do
__fb_ioctl(...)
{
<copy fb_ioctl() into here>
}
fb_ioctl(...)
{
mutex_lock(&info->hwlock);
__fb_ioctl(...);
mutex_unlock(&info->hwlock);
}
and then change fb_compat_ioctl() to call __fb_ioctl(). All the other
callers of fb_ioctl() would need to be reviewed - see if they need to take
the mutex then call __fb_ioctl(), or they might be OK as they are, calling
fb_ioctl().
Then we can switch fb_fops over to
.ioctl = NULL,
.unlocked_ioctl = fb_ioctl,
--
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