Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:17:12 +0000
From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Jan Blunck <jblunck@suse.de>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
       Linux-Kernel Mailinglist <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, jkacur@redhat.com,
       Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
       Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
       =?ISO-8859-14?B?RnLpZOlyaWM=?= Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
       Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] BKL: Remove BKL from default_llseek()
Message-ID: <20091118181712.14a2404c@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20091118175307.GQ21750@bolzano.suse.de>
References: <1258560457-15129-1-git-send-email-jblunck@suse.de>
	<20091118171524.4d2f8cec@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
	<20091118175307.GQ21750@bolzano.suse.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 661
Lines: 14

> As I said, f_pos is changed without holding BKL in the VFS already. Therefore

IFF the VFS paths that change it can be invoked in parallel.

> even if the driver tries to protect f_pos by holding the BKL it is racing
> against concurrent read()/write() anyway on f_pos.

It may simply be a matter of internal consistency. Anyway I've now made a
list of the offenders so we can simply fix/delete them and continue.
--
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/