On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> People _still_ don't understand.
>
> AL VIRO DID NOT REMOVE THE BKL.
>
> He MOVED it. He moved it into the "release()" function, so that we can
> pick them off one-by-one.
I know this. I've already sent you a patch to remove it again from one of
my drivers where he'd added it to be safe.
> Some of them were never needed (like the networking code that actually
> dropped it on purpose immediately), and some of them will be trivial
> to fix up.
...especially if we put the suggested check into sleep_on() to catch the
cases where we fuck it up, at least temporarily.
> But no behaviour was changed. sleep_on() is still valid, because code that
> used to have the kernel lock _still_ has the kernel lock. It's just that
> they got it themselves, instead of depending on the VFS layer to get it
> for them.
If the next step isn't to start removing the BKL from some of those
sections of code, then what's the point? And if that _is_ the next step,
then I stand by my request that a sanity check be put in sleep_on() or
better still, that sleep_on() just be removed to prevent it from being
misused.
-- dwmw2- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 15 2000 - 15:49:39 EDT