From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759238AbZJNTfW (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Oct 2009 15:35:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759121AbZJNTfV (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Oct 2009 15:35:21 -0400 Received: from www.tglx.de ([62.245.132.106]:45549 "EHLO www.tglx.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753638AbZJNTfU (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Oct 2009 15:35:20 -0400 Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 21:34:20 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Alan Cox cc: mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@suse.de, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [tip:bkl/drivers] drivers: Remove BKL from misc_open In-Reply-To: <20091014191223.35ba4004@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Message-ID: References: <20091010153349.237173041@linutronix.de> <20091014171249.57dcdcfc@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20091014191223.35ba4004@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Alan Cox wrote: > On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 18:16:58 +0200 (CEST) > Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > on Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Alan Cox wrote: > > > On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 15:47:39 GMT > > > tip-bot for Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > > > > Commit-ID: 40b798efe3460797a4ac928ee2e038774e2758eb > > > > Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/40b798efe3460797a4ac928ee2e038774e2758eb > > > > Author: Thomas Gleixner > > > > AuthorDate: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:35:43 +0000 > > > > Committer: Thomas Gleixner > > > > CommitDate: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:33:32 +0200 > > > > > > > > drivers: Remove BKL from misc_open > > > > > > > > misc_open() is already serialized with misc_mtx. Remove the BKL > > > > locking which got there via the BKL pushdown. > > > > > > NAK. > > > > > > You can't simply assume the mutex is enough - you have to either push it > > > down or review *every* possible called point below the lock_kernel take. > > > > > > In this case the open method of the misc devices below sometimes uses the > > > BKL. > > > > The BKL got pushed down into the open methods of misc dev users and we > > do not need to take it twice in a row, right ? > > Then the comment is misleading and you need to document that you've > already pushed the BKL down into each user and checked them. Fair enough. I fix that. tglx