Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 05:29:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 05:29:21 -0400 Received: from smtpzilla1.xs4all.nl ([194.109.127.137]:64273 "EHLO smtpzilla1.xs4all.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 05:29:20 -0400 Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 11:32:36 +0200 (CEST) From: Roman Zippel X-X-Sender: roman@serv To: Richard Gooch cc: Greg KH , Linus Torvalds , Subject: Re: [BK PATCH] devfs cleanups for 2.5.29 In-Reply-To: <200207310032.g6V0WmW12258@vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 784 Lines: 27 Hi, On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Richard Gooch wrote: > > Are you sure it's save in devfs_open() too? > > Yes. RTFS. I'm trying - without getting headache. In the "devfs=only" case, where is the module count incremented, when a block device is opened? > > Even if it's save/fixed, it's still code duplication. > > No. I leverage fops_get(), a common function. Which is also insufficiently protected. Why do you insist on storing the ops pointer in devfs? As long as devfs is an option, that pointer must be managed at two places. bye, Roman - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/