Re: [PATCH][RFC] kthread abstraction

From: Christoph Hellwig (hch@caldera.de)
Date: Fri Feb 01 2002 - 12:23:54 EST

Next message: Juan Quintela: "Re: [PATCH] devfs v199.8 available"
Previous message: Dave Hansen: "Re: [PATCH][RFC] kthread abstraction"
In reply to: Dave Hansen: "Re: [PATCH][RFC] kthread abstraction"
Next in thread: Dave Hansen: "Re: [PATCH][RFC] kthread abstraction"
Reply: Dave Hansen: "Re: [PATCH][RFC] kthread abstraction"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 09:21:12AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Have you noticed that a lot of kernel daemons hold the BKL whenever
> they're active?

I've seen it a few times.

> Things like nfsd are always holding the BKL, only
> releasing it on schedule(), and exit. Is there any compelling reason to
> hold the BKL during times other than during the daemonize() process?

In general there is no reason. If the data the thread accesses is not
protected by anything but BKL it must hold it - else it seems superflous
to me.

Christoph

-- 
Of course it doesn't work. We've performed a software upgrade.
-
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/

Next message: Juan Quintela: "Re: [PATCH] devfs v199.8 available"
Previous message: Dave Hansen: "Re: [PATCH][RFC] kthread abstraction"
In reply to: Dave Hansen: "Re: [PATCH][RFC] kthread abstraction"
Next in thread: Dave Hansen: "Re: [PATCH][RFC] kthread abstraction"
Reply: Dave Hansen: "Re: [PATCH][RFC] kthread abstraction"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 07 2002 - 21:00:16 EST