Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 9 Jan 2008 02:41:52 +0100 | From | Andi Kleen <> | Subject | Re: [JANITOR PROPOSAL] Switch ioctl functions to ->unlocked_ioctl |
| |
On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 09:31:24PM -0400, Kevin Winchester wrote: > Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Wednesday 09 January 2008, Andi Kleen wrote: > >> I imagined it would check for > >> > >> +struct file_operations ... = { > >> + ... > >> + .ioctl = ... > >> > >> That wouldn't catch the case of someone adding only .ioctl to an > >> already existing file_operations which is not visible in the patch context, > >> but that should be hopefully rare. The more common case is adding > >> completely new operations > > > > Right, this would work fine. We can probably even have a list of > > data structures that work like file_operations in this regard. > > > > file_operations & block_device_operations are the only two that I can find.
There are a few like scsi_host_template that don't have a unlocked_ioctl yet, but that is just something that needs to be fixed.
-Andi
| |