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

[Stefan Richter]

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.  ;-)
http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/5/22/333

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
-=====-==--- -=-= =-===
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
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/