From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 13:05:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 13:04:47 -0500 Received: from courriel.ift.ulaval.ca ([132.203.26.4]:25360 "EHLO courriel.ift.ulaval.ca") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 13:04:39 -0500 To: Robert Love Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.5: further llseek cleanup (3/3) Message-ID: <1012500123.3c59869bbbff0@courriel.ift.ulaval.ca> Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 13:02:03 -0500 From: Guillaume Chamberland-Larose Cc: In-Reply-To: <1012497140.3219.163.camel@phantasy> In-Reply-To: <1012497140.3219.163.camel@phantasy> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program X-Originating-IP: 132.203.26.102 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, I was reading through your patch and got confused: shouldn't you call unlock_kernel() before you return( ret ) in linux-2.5.3/arch/cris/drivers/eeprom.c Just my 0.02$ Guills ------------------------------------------------- Ce message a été envoyé par le serveur IMP du département d'informatique à l'université Laval: courriel.ift.ulaval.ca