Re: [PATCH] more deprectation bits

[Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>]

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Dec 29, 2002 at 01:38:51PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > >
> > > Rename the deprecated attribute to __deprecated to make it obvious
> > > this is something special and to avoid namespace clashes.
> > >
> > > Mark more functionality deprecated:
> > >
> > >  - sleep_on & friends
> >
> > Please do not make sleep_on() generate a warning.  Unless you intend
> > to do the same to lock_kernel().
> >
> > ext3 uses sleep_on().  It is perfectly safe.
> 
> Even if it's safe in that particular case, most code in the kernel runs
> without BKL.  This patch just makes the deprication of sleep_on
> explicit.

This would be more appropriate:


--- 25/kernel/sched.c~a	Sun Dec 29 13:53:24 2002
+++ 25-akpm/kernel/sched.c	Sun Dec 29 13:54:27 2002
@@ -1264,7 +1264,14 @@ long interruptible_sleep_on_timeout(wait
 
 void sleep_on(wait_queue_head_t *q)
 {
+	static int count;
+
 	SLEEP_ON_VAR
+
+	if (count < 10 && !kernel_locked()) {
+		count++;
+		WARN_ON(1);
+	}
 	
 	current->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
 


> > Weaning ext3 off lock_kernel()
> > is a large, delicate and thus-far undesigned body of work.  I've been
> > working on other stuff and it is quite unlikely that ext3 locking will
> > be redesigned in the 2.5 timeframe.
> 
> Then ext3 has to live with using depricated interfaces during 2.6,
> what's the point?

We shouldn't generate tons of bogus warnings for something which
everyone knows about anyway.