lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jul]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: BKL removal
    On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 12:03:08PM +0200, Marco Colombo wrote:
    >> Larry, there's something I've always wanted to ask you about your
    >> idea of the "locking cliff": when you're counting the number of locks,
    >> are you looking at the running image of an OS or at the source?

    On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 03:40:03PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
    > Larry normally talks about the number of conceptual locks. So in order
    > to manipulate a `struct file', it really doesn't matter whether you have
    > to grab the BKL, the files_struct lock or the filp->lock. There's a big
    > difference if you have to grab the filp->pos_lock, the filp->ra_lock and
    > the filp->iobuf_lock. You'd have to know what order to grab them in,
    > for a start.

    This is called "lock depth" and is not related to the total number of
    locks declared in the source. AFAIK no one wants to increase lock depth.


    Cheers,
    Bill
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:27    [W:0.027 / U:0.140 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site