> On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 06:54:04 +0100 Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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()? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
