From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>
Subject: Re: you patch "block: push down BKL into .open and
 .release" and its  changes to xen-blkfront.c
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 13:02:09 +0200
Message-ID: <4C74F831.3040400@fusionio.com>
References: <4C7513AB0200007800012130@vpn.id2.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <4C7513AB0200007800012130@vpn.id2.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>, "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>, "arnd@arndb.de" <arnd@arndb.de>, Daniel Stodden <daniel.stodden@citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 2010-08-25 12:59, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Arnd,
> 
> what was the point of adding {,un}lock_kernel() to blkif_open() and
> blkif_release()? Afaict, the associated bdev is protected by a mutex
> anyway, so even without Daniel's addition of a mutex to these
> paths I don't see the need for the BKL here.

I'll let Arnd answer for himself, but at least in general it's
much easier to let this sort of auditing and final cleanup
be done my the maintainer(s) of the driver in question, as they
are best positioned to verify that the BKL in fact isn't
really necessary in that path anymore.

-- 
Jens Axboe