Re: [PATCH] drivers/char/pcmcia/synclink_cs.c: BKL pushdown?

[lenrek]

On 2009/10/02, at 22:20, Paul Fulghum wrote:

> Alan Cox wrote:
> > On Fri, 02 Oct 2009 19:37:21 +0900
> > lenrek@xxxxxx wrote:
> >
> > > I found the counterpart of function mgslpc_wait_until_sent
> > > in drivers/char/synclinkmp.c (wait_until_sent) is modified to
> > > issue (un)lock_kernel.  This patch does the same modification.
> > >
> > > However, I'm afraid similar modifications are necessary further on
> > > functions
> > > mgslpc_ioctl and mgslpc_write_room.
> >
> > The push down work normally eliminated BKL calls that were  
> > demonstrably
> > not needed and left it in anywhere that needed thought. Do those
> > functions still really need the BKL ?
>
> No, these functions use a device specific spinlock (info->lock)
> when needed. Not even mgslpc_wait_until_sent needs BKL.

How about the BKL calls in synclinkmp.c, synclink.c, and synclink_gt.c?
Can they be safely eliminated?
--
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/