Re: [JANITOR PROPOSAL] Switch ioctl functions to ->unlocked_ioctl
From: Kevin Winchester
Date: Tue Jan 08 2008 - 18:51:06 EST
Andi Kleen wrote:
> Here's a proposal for some useful code transformations the kernel janitors
> could do as opposed to running checkpatch.pl.
>
<snip>
I notice that every driver in drivers/ata uses a .ioctl that points to
ata_scsi_ioctl(). I could add the BKL to that function, and then change
all of the drivers to .unlocked_ioctl, but I assume this would be a
candidate to actually clean up by determining why the lock is needed and
removing it if necessary. Does anyone know off-hand the reason for
needing the lock (I assume someone does or it wouldn't have survived
this long)? If the lock is absolutely required, then I can write the
patch to add lock_kernel() and unlock_kernel().
--
Kevin Winchester
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/