Re: [PATCH 0/5] Pushdown bkl from v4l ioctls

[Alan Cox]

> I much prefer to keep the bkl inside the v4l2 core. One reason is that I
> think that we can replace the bkl in the core with a mutex. Still not
> ideal of course, so the next step will be to implement proper locking in

I did look at this a long time ago - it doesn't really work becaue the
mutex you propose then has to be dropped and taken in the sleeping parts
of each ioctl to avoid app problems and in some cases threaded apps
deadlocking.

I think Arnd is right on his approach to this, having tried the other way.
--
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/