lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jul]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] remove BKL from driverfs
CC'ing Al for comments...

Greg KH wrote:
> bleah, a proliferation of a zillion little spinlocks all across the
> kernel is not my idea of fun :(

A zillion locks each with a single purpose is a lot more fun than 1
lock with a zillion different uses.

> I don't know if a simple spinlock can help us here. Look at
> driverfs_get_inode() and follow that into the vfs layer. Make sure all
> of that is race safe (and isn't currently relying on the BKL.) I'll
> defer to Al Viro's opinion about this, as I don't quite know all of the
> side effects going on at this moment in time.

OK, I agree a simple spinlock is not the way to go because I now see
the sleepable operations in there. But, I don't think
driverfs_get_inode() needs any more locking. The inode that it
references is freshly allocated and my only concern would be about
access from the inode_in_use list. Maybe down()ing i_sem will provide
a bit more protection, but unless the access through inode_in_use is
already a problem, i_sem isn't needed. Any thoughts, Al?

--
Dave Hansen
haveblue@us.ibm.com

-
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 13:27    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site