From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753553Ab1AZQwS (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jan 2011 11:52:18 -0500 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:37437 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752517Ab1AZQwR (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jan 2011 11:52:17 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,380,1291622400"; d="scan'208";a="596683366" Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 08:52:24 -0800 From: Andi Kleen To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/20] hpfs: replace BKL with a global mutex Message-ID: <20110126165223.GA6695@tassilo.jf.intel.com> References: <1295993854-4971-1-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de> <1295993854-4971-11-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de> <201101261350.42789.arnd@arndb.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201101261350.42789.arnd@arndb.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 01:50:42PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 26 January 2011, Andi Kleen wrote: > > I don't think that's a very good idea, there's danger > > of holding it over IO and that would be really bad (as in like MINIX[1]) > > > > It would be better to do it the i810 way and check for the number of > > CPUs at module init time and refuse to run if it's > 1 > > I don't see much value of one evil over the other, but why not. The code > is going away anyway unless someone cleans it up further. I think it's fine because systems running OS/2 likely only have one CPU. This way these guys (if they exist) won't see any regression. -Andi -- Andi Kleen Intel Open Source Technology Center