From: Christoph Hellwig on 6 Jul 2010 22:10
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 11:47:19PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> I don't see any reason why we need the BKL here.
> The functions blkdev_get, blkdev_put, blkpg_ioctl
> and blkdev_reread_part are the only remaining users
> of the big kernel lock in the block layer, and they
> all access the same fields of the bdev and gendisk
> structures, yet they always do so under the protection
> of bdev->bd_mutex.
> The open and close block_device_operations have all
> been converted to grab the BKL themselves, where
> necessary, so as far I can tell it should be safe
> to remove.
The content of the patch really does not match the subject at all,
which is a rather bad thing.
Anyway, dropping from blkdev_reread_part and blkpg_ioctl is easy
enough, and fine from a quick audit of the functions.
Dropping it from blkdev_get/put also seems fine from a quick
glance. But that should be part of pushing the BKL into
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/
Prev: scsi/sd: remove big kernel lock
Next: [PATCH] acerhdf: fix resource reclaim in error path