From: Arnd Bergmann on
On Wednesday 31 March 2010, Alessio Igor Bogani wrote:
>
> The BKL was used into remount_fs pointed function for serialized access to
> super_block from the others super_operations functions.
>
> The function update_sb(), invoked by remount(), seems already well serialized
> with &root->d_inode->i_mutex. Moreover don't seems there are others
> super_operations functions in USB core for usbfs that should access to
> super_block in a way which require BKL.

There is a patch from Jan Blunck pending in the bkl-removal tree that pushes
down the BKL into usbfs_fill_super. Can you confirm that this BKL usage does
not interfere with the one you just removed, and that it can go the same way?

Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Alessio Igor Bogani on
Mr Bergmann,

2010/3/31 Arnd Bergmann <arnd(a)arndb.de>:
[...]
>> The function update_sb(), invoked by remount(), seems already well serialized
>> with &root->d_inode->i_mutex. Moreover don't seems there are others
>> super_operations functions in USB core for usbfs that should access to
>> super_block in a way which require BKL.
>
> There is a patch from Jan Blunck pending in the bkl-removal tree that pushes
> down the BKL into usbfs_fill_super. Can you confirm that this BKL usage does
> not interfere with the one you just removed, and that it can go the same way?

I can confirm that this certainly interfere: So please ignore my patch.

I'll elaborate a new patch when Blunck's works is merged.

Thanks!

Ciao,
Alessio
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/