Re: [discuss] Re: unregister_ioctl32_conversion and modules. ioctl32 revisited.

From: Andi Kleen
Date: Thu Dec 16 2004 - 03:11:56 EST

On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 08:53:01AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > How does this all relate to Ingo's ->unlocked_ioctl stuff which is "an
> > > official way to do BKL-less ioctls"?
> >
> > This is another "official" way which is more powerful. I suppose it
> > will replace Ingo's patch.
> the ALSA changes are mine but i'm otherwise building ontop of the
> following patch in -rc3-mm1:
> whichever approach gets adopted upstream, the various actors ought to
> synchronize a bit more - this is the third approach so far in a very
> short interval to get rid of the BKL in ioctls :-)

I think Michael's patch is best (but I'm probably biased) because it addresses
the independent problem of a race in unregister_ioctl32_conversion() too
(and some other smaller issues in ioctl 32bit emulation)

Andrew, could we replace unlocked_ioctl.patch with Michael's patch? Adapting
depending code should be very easy, since only the name of the function
vector has changed.


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