Hi Frédéric,
Today's linux-next merge of the bkl-ioctl tree got a conflict in
fs/proc/inode.c between commit 3ab8dfb0802f33741cc4afa6adf7cb30b1cd1761
("procfs: Kill the bkl in ioctl") from the bkl-procfs tree and commit
1dd97d3d546aa14db7efa5366b21d1336b91379e ("Rename 'struct
file_operations' 'ioctl' fn pointer to 'bkl_ioctl'") from the bkl-ioctl
tree.
I fixed it up (see below - probably not optimal) and can carry the fix as
necessary.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
diff --cc fs/proc/inode.c
index aea8502,8e8f813..0000000
--- a/fs/proc/inode.c
+++ b/fs/proc/inode.c
@@@ -231,10 -231,10 +231,10 @@@ static long proc_reg_unlocked_ioctl(str
rv = unlocked_ioctl(file, cmd, arg);
if (rv == -ENOIOCTLCMD)
rv = -EINVAL;
- } else if (ioctl) {
+ } else if (bkl_ioctl) {
- lock_kernel();
+ WARN_ONCE(1, "Procfs ioctl handlers must use unlocked_ioctl, "
+ "%pf will be called without the Bkl held\n", bkl_ioctl);
- rv = ioctl(file->f_path.dentry->d_inode, file, cmd, arg);
+ rv = bkl_ioctl(file->f_path.dentry->d_inode, file, cmd, arg);
- unlock_kernel();
}
pde_users_dec(pde);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
