From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
jblunck@suse.de, Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, John Kacur <jkacur@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT, RFC] Killing the Big Kernel Lock
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 14:27:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BAF4B49.9070308@s5r6.in-berlin.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201003271537.40488.arnd@arndb.de>
Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> Your patches look good, but it would be helpful to also set .llseek = no_llseek
> in the file operations, because that is much easier to grep for than
> only the nonseekable_open. While it's technically a NOP on the presence of
> nonseekable_open, it will help that I don't accidentally apply my patch on
> top of yours.
Sounds like a plan, but (a) if my .llseek = no_llseek and your .llseek =
default_llseek are not within diff context range, you (or whoever else
merges mine and yours) only get a compiler warning (Initializer entry
defined twice) rather than a merge conflict which couldn't be missed,
(b) there won't be a merge conflict in "BKL removal: mark remaining
users as 'depends on BKL'". (c) While I don't mind adding more visual
clutter to ieee1394/*, I prefer terse coding in firewire/*.
How about I put my nonseekable_open additions into a release branch and
send you a pull request after a few days exposure in linux-next? If you
do not plan to respin your patch queue soon or at all, I could even let
you pull a for-arnd branch with a semantically correct merge of yours
and mine.
General thoughts:
".llseek = NULL," so far meant "do the Right Thing on lseek() and
friends, as far as the fs core can tell". Shouldn't we keep it that
way? It's as close to other ".method = NULL," as it can get, which
either mean "silently skip this method if it doesn't matter" (e.g.
.flush) or "fail attempts to use this method with a fitting errno" (e.g.
.write).
Of course, as we have already seen with infiniband, firewire, ieee1394,
.llseek = NULL is ambiguous in practice. Does the driver really want to
use default_llseek, or should it rather use no_llseek and/or
nonseekable_open, or should it even implement a dummy_llseek() { return
0; } which avoids the BKL but preserves ABI behaviour? This needs to be
resolved for each and every case eventually, regardless of whether or
when your addition of .llseek = default_llseek enters mainline.
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-==-=- --== ===--
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-28 12:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-24 21:40 [GIT, RFC] Killing the Big Kernel Lock Arnd Bergmann
2010-03-24 21:07 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-25 10:26 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-03-28 20:33 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-24 21:53 ` Roland Dreier
2010-03-24 21:59 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-03-31 5:22 ` Roland Dreier
2010-03-24 22:10 ` Alan Cox
2010-03-24 22:25 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-03-24 22:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-25 12:55 ` Jiri Kosina
2010-03-25 13:06 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-03-25 13:38 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-03-26 23:47 ` Stefan Richter
2010-03-27 9:16 ` [PATCH] firewire: char device files are not seekable (BKL removal) Stefan Richter
2010-03-27 9:20 ` [PATCH] ieee1394: " Stefan Richter
2010-03-27 10:40 ` [PATCH RFC] DVB: add dvb_generic_nonseekable_open, dvb_generic_unlocked_ioctl, use in firedtv Stefan Richter
2010-03-28 14:47 ` [PATCH RFC v2] " Stefan Richter
2010-03-27 14:37 ` [GIT, RFC] Killing the Big Kernel Lock Arnd Bergmann
2010-03-28 12:27 ` Stefan Richter [this message]
2010-03-28 20:05 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-03-28 20:15 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-28 21:34 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-03-28 23:24 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-04-08 20:45 ` Jan Blunck
2010-04-08 21:27 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-04-08 21:30 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-04-09 11:02 ` Jan Blunck
2010-04-10 15:13 ` Stefan Richter
2010-03-28 21:58 ` Andi Kleen
2010-03-29 1:07 ` [GIT, RFC] Killing the Big Kernel Lock II Andi Kleen
2010-03-29 11:48 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-03-29 12:30 ` Andi Kleen
2010-03-29 14:43 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-03-29 20:11 ` Andi Kleen
2010-03-31 15:30 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-03-25 13:40 ` [GIT, RFC] Killing the Big Kernel Lock Dan Carpenter
2010-03-25 14:14 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-03-28 20:04 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-28 20:11 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-28 23:18 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-28 23:38 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-29 11:04 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-03-29 17:59 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-29 21:18 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-03-29 12:45 ` John Kacur
2010-03-31 22:11 ` Roland Dreier
2010-03-31 22:20 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-04-01 8:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
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=4BAF4B49.9070308@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
--to=stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
--cc=alan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jblunck@suse.de \
--cc=jkacur@redhat.com \
--cc=jkosina@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).