Re: [PATCH] video4linux: Push down the BKL

[Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>]

> On the other hand, the next level of BKL pushdown would be painful as
> all hell, given the massive number of callbacks in the V4L2 API.  So I'm
> thinking it might be justified to create a video_ioctl2_locked() for
> V4L2 drivers which are not yet known to be safe in the absence of the
> BKL.  The amount of extra code would be quite small, and it would let
> safe drivers operate BKL-free.

The problem is that currently they are almost all unsafe - I did a quick
survey as part of the changes. Pushing it down to the video2_ioctl is a
starting point, but the v4l layer is going to need a lot of love and its
own gradual migration.

Right now we've gone from BKL buried in fs to BKL at top of v4l layer
which is indeed only a starting point. I'd assumed the same as you are
think a new video_ioctl2 and switching drivers one by one (I was assuming
adding video2_ioctl_unlocked())

Alan