Re: [PATCH] [2/11] Add unlocked_fasync

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 02:31:11PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> 
> Add a new fops entry point to allow fasync without BKL. While it's arguably
> unclear this entry point is called often enough for it really matters
> it was still relatively easy to do. And there are far less async users
> in the tree than ioctls so it's likely they can be all converted 
> eventually and then the non unlocked async entry point could be dropped.
> 
> There was still the problem of the actual flags change being
> protected against other setters of flags. Instead of using BKL
> for this use the i_mutex now.
> 
> I also added a mutex_lock against one other flags change
> that was lockless and could potentially lose updates.
> 
> There are a couple of potential problems I added comments about on.

I'd rather do a properly flag day and move lock_kernel into the
instances instead of adding this _unlocked gunk.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/