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:0.166 / U:1.064 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site