From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756784AbYEWPzf (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 May 2008 11:55:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752326AbYEWPz2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 May 2008 11:55:28 -0400 Received: from earthlight.etchedpixels.co.uk ([81.2.110.250]:52886 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751679AbYEWPz1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 May 2008 11:55:27 -0400 Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 16:39:56 +0100 From: Alan Cox To: corbet@lwn.net (Jonathan Corbet) Cc: video4linux-list@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mchehab@infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] video4linux: Push down the BKL Message-ID: <20080523163956.6e93746c@core> In-Reply-To: <9027.1211551014@vena.lwn.net> References: <20080522223700.2f103a14@core> <9027.1211551014@vena.lwn.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.3.1 (GTK+ 2.12.5; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Organization: Red Hat UK Cyf., Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, Y Deyrnas Gyfunol. Cofrestrwyd yng Nghymru a Lloegr o'r rhif cofrestru 3798903 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > 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 From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mx3.redhat.com (mx3.redhat.com [172.16.48.32]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m4NFtQGD010051 for ; Fri, 23 May 2008 11:55:26 -0400 Received: from lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (earthlight.etchedpixels.co.uk [81.2.110.250]) by mx3.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m4NFtF0h004625 for ; Fri, 23 May 2008 11:55:15 -0400 Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 16:39:56 +0100 From: Alan Cox To: corbet@lwn.net (Jonathan Corbet) Message-ID: <20080523163956.6e93746c@core> In-Reply-To: <9027.1211551014@vena.lwn.net> References: <20080522223700.2f103a14@core> <9027.1211551014@vena.lwn.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: video4linux-list@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mchehab@infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] video4linux: Push down the BKL List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: video4linux-list-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: video4linux-list-bounces@redhat.com List-ID: > 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 -- video4linux-list mailing list Unsubscribe mailto:video4linux-list-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/video4linux-list