Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 21 Jul 2000 01:43:23 -0400 (EDT) | | From | Alexander Viro <> | | Subject | Re: [Announce] BKL shifting into drivers and filesystems - beware |
| |
On Thu, 13 Jul 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > * ->mmap() in file_operations, ->revalidate(), ->readlink() and > > ->follow_link() in inode_operations and all methods in dentry_operations > > are called without the BKL. Take yourself if you need it. > > Is this true for drivers. If so the sound stuff will probably need work. Work > Im not doing.
In the tree? Then it's done. Otherwise put lock_kernel() upon the entry to your ->release() and unlock_kernel() before each return from said functions.
> > * ->release() will be called without BKL. You need it - you take it. > > You want it for 2.4 you fix the drivers.
Which I did. But I _can't_ do it for 3rd-party code. If you know how one could locate all boxen belonging to developers of such code, break into each one, find their patches and do updates - pray tell, it should be interesting. In-tree code _had_ _been_ _updated_. If you can show a single time when I had submitted "oh, let's break everything and let maintainers fix it" kind of patch - you are welcome, name the version when it had happened and accept my deep apologies.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |