lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jul]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: BKL removal
Robert Love wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-07-09 at 14:00, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>
>
>>This is an ugly aspect. But AFAICT the most that's needed to clean it
>>up is an explicit release before potentially sleeping.
>
>
> Yep that is all we need... remove the release_kernel_lock() and
> reacquire_kernel_lock() from schedule and do it explicitly everywhere it
> is needed.
>
> The problem is, it is needed in a _lot_ of places. Mostly instances
> where the lock is held across something that may implicitly sleep.

And _that_ is why I wrote the BKL debugging patch, to help find these
places at runtime. It may not be pretty, but it works. I'll post it
again if you're interested.

--
Dave Hansen
haveblue@us.ibm.com

-
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:0.234 / U:0.340 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site