Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 20 May 2008 19:51:57 +0100 | From | Alan Cox <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH, RFC] char dev BKL pushdown |
| |
> Right, unless Alan or Wim are confident enough that removing the > BKL won't break the drivers (more than they are today). > Almost all of the open functions go along the lines of > > int open(struct file *f, struct inode *i) > { > if (wd_is_open) > return -EBUSY; > wd_is_open = 1; > > start_wd(); > > return nonseekable_open(f, i); > } > > nonseekable_open doesn't need the BKL by itself, and the wd_is_open > variable is protected by the misc_mtx mutex. > I can't see any scenario in which start_wd() would need the BKL, or
You need to review the use of misc_register(). Which is what I did already and sorted out for each watchdog - the job is done and completed and the various problem cases fixed. Watchdog has already been made BKL removal safe in the patch series I sent.
Alan
| |