From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 18:01:54 -0400 From: Alan Cox To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab Message-ID: <20080526220154.GA15487@devserv.devel.redhat.com> References: <20080522223700.2f103a14@core> <20080526135951.7989516d@gaivota> <20080526202317.GA12793@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20080526181027.1ff9c758@gaivota> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080526181027.1ff9c758@gaivota> Cc: Alan Cox , video4linux-list@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alan Cox 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 Mon, May 26, 2008 at 06:10:27PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > The hardest and optimal scenario is to look inside all drivers, fix the locks > (and pray for a further patch to not break them). I'm afraid that this is a long > term strategy. Ultimately that is where you end up. > For example, a very simple scenario would simply replace BKL by one mutex. > This way, just one ioctl could be handled at the same time. This is something video2_ioctl_serialized() ? -- video4linux-list mailing list Unsubscribe mailto:video4linux-list-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/video4linux-list