Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 17:57:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 17:57:03 -0400 Received: from lightning.swansea.linux.org.uk ([194.168.151.1]:61190 "EHLO the-village.bc.nu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 17:57:02 -0400 Subject: Re: BKL removal To: rml@mvista.com (Robert Love) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 23:21:25 +0100 (BST) Cc: wli@holomorphy.com (William Lee Irwin III), ricklind@us.ibm.com (Rick Lindsley), greg@kroah.com (Greg KH), haveblue@us.ibm.com (Dave Hansen), kernel-janitor-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net (kernel-janitor-discuss), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <1026249175.1033.1178.camel@sinai> from "Robert Love" at Jul 09, 2002 02:12:55 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Alan Cox Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 929 Lines: 19 > Places that call schedule() explicitly holding the BKL are rare enough > we can probably handle them. I have a patch that does so (thus turning > all cond_resched() calls into no-ops with the preemptive kernel -- my > goal). The other implicit situations are near impossible to handle. There are lots of them hiding 8) > Summary is, I would love to do things like dismantle the BKLs odd-ball > features... cleanly and safely. Good luck ;) You can actually do it with some testing to catch the missed cases. Move them to spinlocks, lob a check if the lock is held into the schedule code run it for a while through its various code paths, then remove the debug once you trust it - 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/