Hi, Jean,
> I am looking at this patch of yours:
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=3db633ee352bfe20d4a2b0c3c8a46ce31a6c7149
>
> I believe that no locking is needed in i2cdev_open(). Do you have any
> reason to think it does? If not, can I simply revert this patch?
Before now, i2cdev_open() has always had the protection of the BKL.
When I pushed that locking down into the individual open() functions, I
really had to take a pretty conservative approach and assume that the
BKL was needed unless that was really obviously not the case. In
i2cdev_open(), for example, there's:
i2c_dev = i2c_dev_get_by_minor(minor);
and I really don't know what keeps *i2c_dev from going away during the
rest of the call. I'm *not* saying there is a problem here; I just
don't know. So the only thing I could really do is to push the BKL
down and let the maintainers sort it out.
...all of which is my long-winded way of saying that, if you're
convinced that i2cdev_open() is safe in the absence of the BKL, feel
free to take it out.
Thanks,
jon
_______________________________________________
i2c mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c
