From: Christoph H. <hc...@in...> - 2004-09-29 13:31:40
|
On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 02:29:24PM +0100, Keith Whitwell wrote: > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > - drm_flush is a noop. a NULL ->flush does the same thing, just easier > > - dito or ->poll > > - dito for ->read > > Pretty sure you couldn't get away with null for these in 2.4, at least. Umm, of course you could. There's only a hanfull instance defining a ->flush at all. Similarly all file_ops for regular files and many char devices don't have ->poll. no ->read is pretty rare but 2.4 chæcks it aswell. |