On 03/10/2008 11:28 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
quoted text
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 10:06:43PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
>> On 10 Mar 2008 23:12:51 +0100
>> Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> writes:
>>>
>>>> This function still depends on the big kernel lock in some cases. Push
>>>> locking into the function ready for removal of the BKL from ioctl call
>>>> paths.
>>> Didn't you forget the .ioctl -> .unlocked_ioctl change?
>> We are not yet ready to unlock the device ioctl paths for tty. We still
> 
> Traditionally the usual is to first convert .ioctl to .unlocked_ioctl
> and just slap lock_kernel around the whole ioctl handler and then 
> later move it down step by step.
> 
> I didn't read the code completely but I assume tty_ioctl would be that
> handler. I guess i was wrong?

tty_ioctl is already unlocked_ioctl (in -mm) ;). These patches are those next 
steps to propagate the bkl down.

regards,
--js
--
unsubscribe notice
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/