Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268883AbUIQPed (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Sep 2004 11:34:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268734AbUIQPd7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Sep 2004 11:33:59 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:41630 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268883AbUIQPQ3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Sep 2004 11:16:29 -0400 Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 08:16:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Ingo Molnar cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , William Lee Irwin III , Arjan van de Ven , Lee Revell Subject: Re: [patch] remove the BKL (Big Kernel Lock), this time for real In-Reply-To: <20040917103945.GA19861@elte.hu> Message-ID: References: <20040915151815.GA30138@elte.hu> <20040917103945.GA19861@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1011 Lines: 26 On Fri, 17 Sep 2004, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > the attached patch is a simplified variant of the remove-bkl patch i > sent two days ago: it doesnt do the ->cpus_allowed trick. > > The question is, is there any BKL-using kernel code that relies on the > task not migrating to another CPU within the BLK critical section? I don't think there can be any _valid_ such use. Anything that knows about CPU's has to use "get_cpu()/put_cpu()" anyway. You might add back in the debugging checks that we used to have for "smp_processor_id()" in this patch for testing, and if it goes into -mm we'd see if anything triggers. I still don't exactly love this patch to death, but making the cpumask trickery go away does make it look a lot simpler, I have to say. Linus - 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/