lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [May]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectUnserializing ioctl() system calls
Date
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:03    [W:0.035 / U:0.148 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site