Re: [PATCH 2/4] Convert epoll to a bitlock

[Jonathan Corbet]

On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 18:20:18 +1100
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wednesday 04 February 2009 18:13:20 Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 04:19:31PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:  
> > >  1) Use i_lock to protect accesses to f_flags.  This would enable
> > > some BKL usage to be removed, but would not fix fasync.  
> >
> > What about just turning f_ep_lock into f_lock and using it?  
> 
> Ah, yes I was going to say that too, but I confused i_lock with
> i_mutex because it sounded like Jon needed a sleeping lock here?

Sigh, obviously that's what I should do.  Sorry for being so dense.
Consider it done.

[About sleeping locks: *if* one puts a lock around ->fasync(), it needs
to be a sleeping lock.  But moving FASYNC bit handling down gets rid of
the need to do that, so f_lock would be fine.]

Thanks,

jon
--
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/