Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 12:22:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 12:21:55 -0500 Received: from e1.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.101]:14512 "EHLO e1.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 12:21:43 -0500 Message-ID: <3C5ACE88.1050002@us.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2002 09:21:12 -0800 From: Dave Hansen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8+) Gecko/20020126 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christoph Hellwig CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] kthread abstraction In-Reply-To: <20020201163818.A32551@caldera.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I notice that the BKL is held for a short time, while daemonizing: + lock_kernel(); + daemonize(); + reparent_to_init(); + strcpy(current->comm, kth->name); + unlock_kernel(); Have you noticed that a lot of kernel daemons hold the BKL whenever they're active? Things like nfsd are always holding the BKL, only releasing it on schedule(), and exit. Is there any compelling reason to hold the BKL during times other than during the daemonize() process? -- Dave Hansen haveblue@us.ibm.com - 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/