Re: [PATCH 1/1] vfs: umount_begin BKL pushdown v2

Christoph Hellwig
2009-04-24T08:50:38Z

On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 10:06:34AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> You've not replied to my request (attached below) to put these
> trivial BKL-pushdown bits into a separate branch/tree and not into
> the VFS tree. You've now mixed that commit with other VFS changes.
>
> Had it been in a separate branch, and had we tested it, Linus could
> have pulled the trivial BKL pushdown bits out of normal merge order
> as well. That is not possible now.

It shouldn't be pushed out of order. It's a normal VFS locking change
and should be pushed with the next VFS push for 2.6.31.

> Furthermore, by doing this you are also hindering the
> tip:kill-the-BKL effort (which has been ongoing for a year chipping
> away at various BKL details) which facilitated these changes.
> Alessio did these fixes to fix bugs he can trigger in that tree.
>
> You've also not explained why you have done it this way. It would
> cost you almost nothing to apply these bits into a separate branch
> and merge that branch into your main tree. Lots of other maintainer
> are doing that.

Having a separate kill the BKL tree is a stupid idea. Locking changes
need deep subsystem knowledge and should always go through the subsystem
trees.