Re: [PATCH] i2c: Push ioctl BKL down into the i2c code

From: Stefan Richter
Date: Fri May 23 2008 - 04:48:19 EST

Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Thu, 22 May 2008 22:23:27 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Description of what the patch does and why it is needed, please. I
> can't apply it without that. My first impression is a patch making the
> code bigger and more complex with no obvious benefit ;)

I wasn't asked, but:

The patch description was factored out. ;-)

AFAIU it's a preparation for

--- a/include/linux/fs.h
+++ b/include/linux/fs.h
@@ ?? @@ struct file_operations {
unsigned int (*poll) (struct file *, struct poll_table_struct *);
- int (*ioctl) (struct inode *, struct file *, unsigned int, unsigned long);
long (*unlocked_ioctl) (struct file *, unsigned int, unsigned long);

Obvious benefits:
- No new .ioctl()s.
- Heads up for subsystem people: "Did you know you are taking the BKL?
You probably don't need to, and you definitely don't want to."
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- -=-= =-===
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at