From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com>
To: "David C. Hansen" <haveblue@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove BKL from drivers' release functions
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:37:35 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C05834F.13C60B0C@mandrakesoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E169EFX-0006TA-00@the-village.bc.nu> <3C057410.3090201@us.ibm.com> <20011128234505.C2561@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <3C0580A8.5030706@us.ibm.com>
"David C. Hansen" wrote:
>
> Russell King wrote:
>
> >On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 03:32:32PM -0800, David C. Hansen wrote:
> >
> >>Nothing, because the BKL is not held for all opens anymore. In most of
> >>the cases that we addressed, the BKL was in release _only_, not in open
> >>at all. There were quite a few drivers where we added a spinlock, or
> >>used atomic operations to keep open from racing with release.
> >>
> >
> >All char and block devs are opened with the BKL held - see chrdev_open in
> >fs/devices.c and do_open in fs/block_dev.c
> >
> I wrote a quick and dirty char device driver to see if this happened.
> If I run two tasks doing a bunch of opens and closes, the -EBUSY
> condition in the open function does happen. Is my driver doing
> something wrong?
>
> Here is the meat of the driver:
>
> static int Device_Open = 0;
>
> int testdev_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> {
> if ( test_and_set_bit(0,&Device_Open) ) {
> printk( "attempt to open testdev more than once\n" );
> return -EBUSY;
> }
> MOD_INC_USE_COUNT;
> return SUCCESS;
> }
>
> int testdev_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> {
> clear_bit(0,&Device_Open);
> MOD_DEC_USE_COUNT;
> return 0;
> }
it is still racy, that's why struct file_operations and other structs
have an 'owner' member......
--
Jeff Garzik | Only so many songs can be sung
Building 1024 | with two lips, two lungs, and one tongue.
MandrakeSoft | - nomeansno
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-11-29 0:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-11-28 23:05 [PATCH] remove BKL from drivers' release functions David C. Hansen
2001-11-28 23:29 ` Andrew Morton
2001-11-28 23:42 ` David C. Hansen
2001-11-28 23:50 ` Robert Love
2001-11-28 23:36 ` Alan Cox
2001-11-28 23:32 ` David C. Hansen
2001-11-28 23:45 ` Russell King
2001-11-29 0:26 ` David C. Hansen
2001-11-29 0:37 ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
2001-11-29 0:41 ` Russell King
2001-11-29 1:33 ` David C. Hansen
2001-11-29 1:42 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-11-29 7:17 ` Oliver Neukum
2001-11-29 1:47 ` Alan Cox
2001-11-29 9:15 ` Russell King
2001-11-29 13:55 ` BALBIR SINGH
2001-11-30 19:30 ` Rick Lindsley
2001-11-30 9:57 ` Alexander Viro
2001-11-30 12:41 ` Victor Yodaiken
2001-11-30 20:02 ` Rick Lindsley
2001-11-30 19:38 ` David C. Hansen
2001-11-30 23:12 ` Alexander Viro
2001-12-01 0:47 ` Rick Lindsley
2001-12-01 9:52 ` Alan Cox
2001-12-01 10:06 ` Rick Lindsley
2001-11-30 20:11 ` Rick Lindsley
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3C05834F.13C60B0C@mandrakesoft.com \
--to=jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rmk@arm.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox