On Tue, 1 Jun 2010, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> BKL was not really needed, just came from earlier push downs.
Yes.
> The only part that's a bit dodgy is the lseek function. Would
> need another lock or atomic access to fpos on 32bit?
> Better to have a libfs lseek
It doesn't matter. Anyone who tries to do lseeks on this file
from two different threads, simultaneously, deserves what they get.
> @@ -539,11 +534,11 @@ static loff_t uhci_debug_lseek(struct file *file, loff_t off, int whence)
> new = file->f_pos + off;
> break;
> }
> +
> + /* XXX: Can size shrink? */
> if (new < 0 || new > up->size) {
> - unlock_kernel();
> return -EINVAL;
> }
> - unlock_kernel();
> return (file->f_pos = new);
> }
This comment isn't needed; the size cannot change after the file has
been opened.
Alan Stern
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
