Re: [PATCH] f_op->poll() without lock_kernel()

From: willy@thepuffingroup.com
Date: Sat Apr 22 2000 - 02:05:15 EDT

  • Next message: Keith Owens: "Re: [RFC] Flat /lib/modules/`uname -r`"

    On Fri, Apr 21, 2000 at 08:44:42PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote:
    >
    >
    > On Fri, 21 Apr 2000, David S. Miller wrote:
    >
    > > Dave, what's up with sock_no_foo() stuff? Mind if I'll replace (some
    > > of?) them with NULLs, taking the tests into net/socket.c?
    > >
    > > Please no, the whole point of the sock_no_*() stuff was to _REMOVE_
    > > the tests from the socket.c code.
    >
    > Point taken, but I still want to look who calls them and how many PFs have
    > non-default stuff in the first place. E.g. ->mmap() just looks wrong. Oh,
    > well...

    While you're playing with this stuff, I noticed that no-one actually has
    anything in their fcntl method except sock_no_fcntl (net/core/sock.c).
    Any objections to simply removing this field from the structure and
    moving the body of sock_no_fcntl into sock_fcntl (net/socket.c)?

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 22 2000 - 01:11:21 EDT