lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
Subjectlock_kernel() usage and sync_*() functions
Why is the kernel lock held around sync_supers() and sync_inodes() in
sync_old_buffers() and fsync_dev(), but not in sync_dev()? Is it just
to serialize calls to these functions, or is there some other reason?

Since this use of the BKL is one of the causes of high preemption
latency in a preemptible kernel, I'm hoping it would be OK to replace
them with a semaphore. Please let me know if this is not the case.

Thanks!

Nigel Gamble nigel@nrg.org
Mountain View, CA, USA. http://www.nrg.org/

MontaVista Software nigel@mvista.com

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:29    [W:0.051 / U:0.252 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site