> Btw, why is unlocked_ioctl returning "long"? Does anybody depend on that > too? That's another difference between the "unlocked" and the traditional > version.. I don't know - a lot of syscall returns got defined as long and I guess someone thought propogating the right type was a good diea ? > > As to the "x86 cases", I think you should try to hit them all. Doing a > "git grep unlocked_ioctl" gets 185 entries, and it looks like only > something like 8 of them are non-x86 (3 in the arch/ directory, five in > s390 drivers). > > Of course, some of them may be drivers that aren't available on x86 for > other reasons (ie the ARM embedded stuff), but regardless.. > > Anyway, the pure size of that patch makes me suspect that we might as well > leave it until the next merge window, but if you do it and it's obviously > totally mechanical, I'd be likely to just let it slip in early. I'll take a crack at it tomorrow - but if its 185 entries then it probably wants to go into -next instead. Alan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
