Drew P. Vogel wrote:
>> If nothing else, I hope you will think twice before sending off
>> your next BKL removel patch in a subsystem that you haven't fully
>> tested or understood. That's the point I keep trying to get across
>> here.
>>
>>So can you define for me under what conditions the BKL is appropriate
>>to use? Removing it from legitimate uses would be bad, of course, but
>>part of the problem here is that it's currently used for a variety of
>>unrelated purposes.
>
> If the trade-offs weigh in about the same, removing the BKL from
> legitimate uses in favor of a different (neither better nor worse)
> approach would be more than acceptable, would it not?
I think Greg's main protests are about the methods, not the means.
> Would creating a few new names for lock_kernel() and friends be
> acceptable? Just a few macros to give slightly more meaningful names to
> each function call for 2.5. Then take lock_kernel() entirely away (the
> name, not the function), in 2.7. By 2.9 it should be able to be removed
> from nearly all "inappropriate" uses. This seems like it would encourage
> more explicit usage of the BKL, while giving maintainers ample time to
> comply.
I would really prefer not to see the name changed. In some places
people do this:
#define mydriver_lock() lock_kernel();
#define mydriver_unlock() unlock_kernel();
All that this really does is obscure the BKL's use -- it makes it 1
step harder to track down. If you need a spinlock, use a spinlock.
If you need the BKL, by all means, take the BKL.
A comment is immeasurable better than a different name. I would say,
if you need/want the BKL, justify it with a comment, not a name.
> Note that I have never added or removed a lock from the kernel. I am
> simply thinking aloud; half hoping to be corrected.
I know the feeling :)
-- 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 15 2002 - 22:00:14 EST