Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 10:37:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 10:37:20 -0400 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:39943 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 10:37:19 -0400 Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 15:40:03 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Marco Colombo Cc: Larry McVoy , kernel-janitor-discuss , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: BKL removal Message-ID: <20020710154003.Z27706@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> References: <20020708222127.G11300@work.bitmover.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from marco@esi.it on Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 12:03:08PM +0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 941 Lines: 19 On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 12:03:08PM +0200, Marco Colombo wrote: > Larry, there's something I've always wanted to ask you about your > idea of the "locking cliff": when you're counting the number of locks, > are you looking at the running image of an OS or at the source? Larry normally talks about the number of conceptual locks. So in order to manipulate a `struct file', it really doesn't matter whether you have to grab the BKL, the files_struct lock or the filp->lock. There's a big difference if you have to grab the filp->pos_lock, the filp->ra_lock and the filp->iobuf_lock. You'd have to know what order to grab them in, for a start. -- Revolutions do not require corporate support. - 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/