From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] BKL pushdown from do_new_mount() to the filesystems Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 09:46:25 -0600 Message-ID: <20090930154625.GH1058@parisc-linux.org> References: <1254324604-20243-1-git-send-email-jblunck@suse.de> <1254324604-20243-2-git-send-email-jblunck@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Jan Blunck Return-path: Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:45903 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754601AbZI3PqW (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:46:22 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1254324604-20243-2-git-send-email-jblunck@suse.de> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 05:30:02PM +0200, Jan Blunck wrote: > Push down the big kernel lock to the filesystem implementations. Missing from this email is an assertion: "I've read through all the code formerly covered by the BKL inside do_kern_mount() and have satisfied myself that it doesn't need the BKL any more" I haven't spotted anything yet, but there's a non-trivial amount of code which was covered and now isn't. Someone more familiar with this code than I am might be able to spot a new race. -- Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."