From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1760592AbYEOPUU@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1760592AbYEOPUU (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 15 May 2008 11:20:20 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755564AbYEOPUB
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Thu, 15 May 2008 11:20:01 -0400
Received: from Mycroft.westnet.com ([216.187.52.7]:41105 "EHLO
	Mycroft.westnet.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1754922AbYEOPUB (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 15 May 2008 11:20:01 -0400
X-Greylist: delayed 789 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Thu, 15 May 2008 11:19:55 EDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <18476.20788.142218.370584@stoffel.org>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 11:05:24 -0400
From: "John Stoffel" <john@stoffel.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
       Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
       Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
       Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
       Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [announce] "kill the Big Kernel Lock (BKL)" tree
In-Reply-To: <482B65FE.4040402@firstfloor.org>
References: <20080514174955.GA515@elte.hu>
	<6457.1210801515@vena.lwn.net>
	<87bq387cyn.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
	<alpine.LFD.1.10.0805141515020.3019@woody.linux-foundation.org>
	<482B65FE.4040402@firstfloor.org>
X-Mailer: VM 8.0.9 under Emacs 22.2.1 (i486-pc-linux-gnu)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

>>>>> "Andi" == Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> writes:

Andi> Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> 
>> On Thu, 15 May 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
>>> The goal less being to get rid of BKL in old drivers, but not 
>>> requiring BKL in new drivers. Basically all BKL assumptions
>>> in interfaces really should go.
>> 
>> No, we really do want to get rid of BKL in old drivers too. Or at least in 
>> the interfaces.

Andi> In the interfaces definitely yes and all subsystems should have
Andi> their own lock_kernel calls, but why in the old drivers? For
Andi> those it's very unlikely they are used on any SMP system anyways
Andi> (e.g. anything depending on CONFIG_ISA) or if they do only on 2
Andi> CPU systems.

I'm still running an SMP server with ISA slots.  I'd love to
contribute testing and possibly coding to this effort, but
realisticlly I'll be able to compile and boot stuff.

John