Messages in this thread | | | From | "Spinka, Kristofer" <> | Subject | Unserializing ioctl() system calls | Date | Fri, 21 May 2004 22:46:45 -0400 |
| |
I noticed that even in the 2.6.6 code, callers to ioctl system call (sys_ioctl in fs/ioctl.c) are serialized with {lock,unlock}_kernel().
I realize that many kernel modules, and POSIX for that matter, may not be ready to make this more concurrent.
I propose adding a flag to indicate that the underlying module would like to support its own concurrency management, and thus we avoid grabbing the BKL around the f_op->ioctl call.
The default behavior would adhere to existing standards, and if the flag is present (in the underlying module), we let the module (or modules) handle it.
Reasonable?
/kristofer - 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/
| |