From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH] Convert EXT2 to use unlocked_ioctl Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 13:18:56 +0100 Message-ID: <200801171318.57491.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1200565824-362-1-git-send-email-mathieu.segaud@regala.cx> <200801171254.04071.arnd@arndb.de> <87myr4ek82.fsf@barad-dur.regala.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, sct@redhat.com To: Mathieu SEGAUD Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.179]:55224 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751481AbYAQMTP (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jan 2008 07:19:15 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87myr4ek82.fsf@barad-dur.regala.cx> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thursday 17 January 2008, Mathieu SEGAUD wrote: > yep, they do. I noticed this nested calls. I guess I will add > _extX_compat_ioctl() running with no BKL's which would be used by both > extX_ioctl() and extX_compat_ioctl(). > Any comments on such a strategy ? thanks a lot for the reminder :) > Why not just kill the lock_kernel() in extX_compat_ioctl()? Arnd <><