lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Oct]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [Ksummit-2010-discuss] [v2] Remaining BKL users, what to do
From
Date
On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 15:36 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> [trimming Cc list]
>
> On Tuesday 19 October 2010, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > I think we also need to cover the PREEMPT case too. But that could be a
> > compile time check, since you can't boot a preempt kernel and make it
> > non preempt.
>
> Right. Can we turn the lock_kernel() into preempt_disable() in these
> drivers when we know we never run on SMP?

I'm not sure that will work. A holder of the BKL can call schedule or
even a mutex. The schedule code will drop the BKL and re-enable
preemption. Unless the code is known not to schedule while holding BKL,
we would need to open code the preempt_enable() around the locations
that the code may schedule.

-- Steve




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-10-19 15:47    [W:0.947 / U:0.516 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site