Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 20 Jun 2008 13:09:05 -0600 | | From | Jonathan Corbet <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH, RFC] fasync() BKL pushdown |
| |
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 19:55:03 +0200 Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:
> Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > > The majority of fasync() functions just call fasync_helper() with a > > pointer to an fasync_struct reachable from the file structure. > > Given that (1) the struct file will not go away while fasync() is > > running, and (2) the VFS-level fasync() stuff is protected with the > > Big Fasync Lock, I contend that these simple implementations have > > no need for the BKL. > > Not necessarily true, they might require BKL still for fd live time > issues.
Could you help me out a bit here? I'm even slower than usual when it comes to VFS stuff. As far as I can tell, the given file cannot go away during the call to fasync(), as sys_fcntl() holds a reference on it. Are you saying that something else can happen during that time?
Thanks,
jon
|  |