lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [GIT PATCH] TTY patches for 2.6.33-git
> I think we could possibly add a "__might_sleep()" to _lock_kernel(). It 
> doesn't really sleep, but it's invalid to take the kernel lock in an
> atomic region, so __might_sleep() might be the right thing anyway.

It's only invalid if you don't already hold the lock. The old tty code
worked because every path into tty_fasync already held the lock ! That
specific case - taking it the first time should definitely
__might_sleep().

Mind you it's probably still rather dumb and would be a good debugging
aid for -next to be able to warn on all offences if only to catch this
stuff for the future BKL removal work.

Alan


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-13 02:59    [W:0.218 / U:0.792 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site