Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 22 Jan 2009 22:57:13 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH, RFC] Remove fasync() BKL usage, take 3325 |
| |
> On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 06:54:04 +0100 Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote: > > I don't know what "the fasync() problem" is? > > The state needs to be protected while the per driver ->fasync callback > runs, otherwise the bit can get out of sync with what the driver > thinks it is.
That's the sort of gem which one thinks might have merited a code comment and some changelog discussion.
> Mind you imho the best way would be to move the bit manipulation for > that into the drivers, but that would require to change them all.
Do these mystery drivers do the ->f_flags changes under lock_kernel()? If so, they all should be changed to take lock_file_flgs()?
| |