[lkml]   [2001]   [Nov]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [LART] pc_keyb.c changes
"David C. Hansen" wrote:
> Alexander Viro wrote:
> > Could the person who switched from BKL to spin_lock_irqsave() in
> > pc_keyb.c please share whatever the hell he had been smoking? Free clue:
> > disabling interrupts for long intervals to improve scalability is right up
> > there with fighting for peace and fucking for virginity.
> As I slowly raise my hand to take, um credit....
> This is definitely one of the drivers I to take a second look at, now
> that I know about the BKL being held for block and char device opens.
> Do you have any ideas how else to do this safely since aux_count is
> referenced during an interrupt?
Um, staying as far away from that bit of source as possible, I will

It depends on how it is referenced. If it is just a counter, you may be
able to just make it atomic. If it needs to "stick" for a little
longer, then consider if there are many readers and only a few writers,
in which case look at the read/write_lockirq code, however, this does
have the down side of irq off. BKL did not protect against interrupts,
so one wonders if the irq bit is needed at all.
Real time sched:
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:13    [W:0.066 / U:0.060 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site