Re: [PATCH, RFC] char dev BKL pushdown

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 09:44:06AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> trivial as to not require locking (quite few of them are "return 0;"), or

If they literaly are 'return 0' you can just remove them, as a
non-existing open op will just be fine.

> (2) clearly doing its own locking, I wrapped the code in the BKL.

Even if clearly does it's own locking please add the BKL for now and let
the maintainers sort it out later, better be safe then sorry.

Except for that thanks a lot, this is the kind of work that's more
productive than all these discussions here :)

For some reason about 80 instances seem awfully few, but we've move a
lot of device into subsystems from beeing plain chardevs so this
might actually be correct.
--
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/