On Mon, 28 Aug 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:
> Umm... I would not do that. Reason: right now BKL can be acquired
> while we are holding a spinlock. It's a bad idea, but it's possible.
hm, shouldnt we fix those places? It sounds extremely dangerous to get the
BKL with a spinlock held.
> With your change it becomes deadly. [...]
agreed, i missed that. Is there any core kernel code that does this? [the
VFS? :-)]
> Another reason: currently BKL can be taken in the middle of operations
> on per-CPU data. It will not block, so nothing will get that CPU while
> we are in lock_kernel(). Not true with your patch.
oops, another thinko indeed. Sigh. Are there any prominent examples of
this? I think we want to fix these.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 31 2000 - 21:00:22 EST