From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1765943AbYESNm1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2008 09:42:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1765281AbYESNiB (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2008 09:38:01 -0400 Received: from vena.lwn.net ([206.168.112.25]:51809 "EHLO vena.lwn.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1765267AbYESNh7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2008 09:37:59 -0400 To: Roland Dreier Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Alan Cox , Alexander Viro , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Rothwell Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] Char dev BKL pushdown v2 From: corbet@lwn.net (Jonathan Corbet) In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 18 May 2008 21:00:45 PDT." Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 07:37:58 -0600 Message-ID: <12244.1211204278@vena.lwn.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Roland Dreier wrote: > Is the plan that we have a pure "push the BKL down" changeset merged, > and then I can merge BKL removal patches for these places that never > needed the BKL? (I guess I can send you such a patch to base on top of > your tree for when Linus pulls it? Is 2.6.27 the plan?) If you're sure that this code doesn't need the BKL (and it kind of looked that way to me), the preferred approach seems to be to put in a comment to that effect so that it's clear that the code has been looked at. So sending me a patch which does this would be great. Otherwise, if you're willing to swear on top of a stack of Knuth output that the BKL is not needed for specific open functions, I can revert my patch back out and put in the comment - whichever you prefer. jon