From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
John Kacur <jkacur@redhat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Subject: [PATCH 5/6] block: remove BKL from partition code
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2010 23:47:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1278193640-24223-6-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1278193640-24223-1-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de>
I don't see any reason why we need the BKL here.
The functions blkdev_get, blkdev_put, blkpg_ioctl
and blkdev_reread_part are the only remaining users
of the big kernel lock in the block layer, and they
all access the same fields of the bdev and gendisk
structures, yet they always do so under the protection
of bdev->bd_mutex.
The open and close block_device_operations have all
been converted to grab the BKL themselves, where
necessary, so as far I can tell it should be safe
to remove.
If it is not, please explain why we still need it.
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
---
block/ioctl.c | 4 ----
fs/block_dev.c | 10 ++--------
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/ioctl.c b/block/ioctl.c
index 60f477c..09fd7f1 100644
--- a/block/ioctl.c
+++ b/block/ioctl.c
@@ -296,14 +296,10 @@ int blkdev_ioctl(struct block_device *bdev, fmode_t mode, unsigned cmd,
bd_release(bdev);
return ret;
case BLKPG:
- lock_kernel();
ret = blkpg_ioctl(bdev, (struct blkpg_ioctl_arg __user *) arg);
- unlock_kernel();
break;
case BLKRRPART:
- lock_kernel();
ret = blkdev_reread_part(bdev);
- unlock_kernel();
break;
case BLKGETSIZE:
size = bdev->bd_inode->i_size;
diff --git a/fs/block_dev.c b/fs/block_dev.c
index 99d6af8..693c2bf 100644
--- a/fs/block_dev.c
+++ b/fs/block_dev.c
@@ -1345,13 +1345,12 @@ static int __blkdev_get(struct block_device *bdev, fmode_t mode, int for_part)
return ret;
}
- lock_kernel();
restart:
ret = -ENXIO;
disk = get_gendisk(bdev->bd_dev, &partno);
if (!disk)
- goto out_unlock_kernel;
+ goto out;
mutex_lock_nested(&bdev->bd_mutex, for_part);
if (!bdev->bd_openers) {
@@ -1431,7 +1430,6 @@ static int __blkdev_get(struct block_device *bdev, fmode_t mode, int for_part)
if (for_part)
bdev->bd_part_count++;
mutex_unlock(&bdev->bd_mutex);
- unlock_kernel();
return 0;
out_clear:
@@ -1444,9 +1442,7 @@ static int __blkdev_get(struct block_device *bdev, fmode_t mode, int for_part)
bdev->bd_contains = NULL;
out_unlock_bdev:
mutex_unlock(&bdev->bd_mutex);
- out_unlock_kernel:
- unlock_kernel();
-
+ out:
if (disk)
module_put(disk->fops->owner);
put_disk(disk);
@@ -1515,7 +1511,6 @@ static int __blkdev_put(struct block_device *bdev, fmode_t mode, int for_part)
struct block_device *victim = NULL;
mutex_lock_nested(&bdev->bd_mutex, for_part);
- lock_kernel();
if (for_part)
bdev->bd_part_count--;
@@ -1540,7 +1535,6 @@ static int __blkdev_put(struct block_device *bdev, fmode_t mode, int for_part)
victim = bdev->bd_contains;
bdev->bd_contains = NULL;
}
- unlock_kernel();
mutex_unlock(&bdev->bd_mutex);
bdput(bdev);
if (victim)
--
1.7.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-03 21:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-03 21:47 [PATCH 0/6] block: BKL removal, version 3 Arnd Bergmann
2010-07-03 21:47 ` [PATCH 1/6] block: push down BKL into .locked_ioctl Arnd Bergmann
2010-07-04 7:30 ` Sam Ravnborg
2010-07-04 20:59 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-07-07 1:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-07 13:28 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-07-03 21:47 ` [PATCH 2/6] block: push down BKL into .open and .release Arnd Bergmann
2010-07-04 8:01 ` Sam Ravnborg
2010-07-04 17:33 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-07-04 20:27 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2010-07-04 21:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-07-07 1:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-07 14:04 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-07-03 21:47 ` [PATCH 3/6] block: push BKL into blktrace ioctls Arnd Bergmann
2010-07-07 1:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-07 13:46 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-07-03 21:47 ` [PATCH 4/6] block: remove BKL from BLKROSET and BLKFLSBUF Arnd Bergmann
2010-07-07 1:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-03 21:47 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2010-07-07 2:04 ` [PATCH 5/6] block: remove BKL from partition code Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-03 21:47 ` [PATCH 6/6] scsi/sd: remove big kernel lock Arnd Bergmann
2010-07-07 2:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-07 13:54 ` Arnd Bergmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1278193640-24223-6-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jkacur@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).