[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180111082813.GA760@lst.de>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 09:28:13 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Avi Kivity <avi@...lladb.com>,
linux-aio@...ck.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/32] fs: introduce new ->get_poll_head and
->poll_mask methods
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 05:22:00AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> Whee... The very first ->poll() instance in alphabetic order on pathnames:
> in arch/cris/arch-v10/drivers/gpio.c
>
> static __poll_t gpio_poll(struct file *file, poll_table *wait)
> {
> __poll_t mask = 0;
> struct gpio_private *priv = file->private_data;
> unsigned long data;
> unsigned long flags;
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&gpio_lock, flags);
>
> poll_wait(file, &priv->alarm_wq, wait);
>
> IOW, we are doing poll_wait() (== possible GFP_KERNEL __get_free_page()) under
> a spinlock...
Yes. Another god reason to separate poll_wait and the actual
event check callback..
Powered by blists - more mailing lists