[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1258540881l.14682l.0l@i-dmzi_al.realan.de>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 11:41:21 +0100
From: Anders Larsen <al@...rsen.net>
To: Jan Blunck <jblunck@...e.de>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Linux-Kernel Mailinglist <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/20] BKL: Explicitly add BKL around get_sb/fill_super
On 2009-11-18 10:24:36, Jan Blunck wrote:
> This patch is a preparation necessary to remove the BKL from do_new_mount().
> It explicitly adds calls to lock_kernel()/unlock_kernel() around
> get_sb/fill_super operations for filesystems that still uses the BKL.
>
> I've read through all the code formerly covered by the BKL inside
> do_kern_mount() and have satisfied myself that it doesn't need the BKL
> any more.
>
> do_kern_mount() is already called without the BKL when mounting the rootfs
> and in nfsctl. do_kern_mount() calls vfs_kern_mount(), which is called
> from various places without BKL: simple_pin_fs(), nfs_do_clone_mount()
> through nfs_follow_mountpoint(), afs_mntpt_do_automount() through
> afs_mntpt_follow_link(). Both later functions are actually the filesystems
> follow_link inode operation. vfs_kern_mount() is calling the specified
> get_sb function and lets the filesystem do its job by calling the given
> fill_super function.
>
> Therefore I think it is safe to push down the BKL from the VFS to the
> low-level filesystems get_sb/fill_super operation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@...e.de>
> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Wrt fs/qnx4:
Acked-by: Anders Larsen <al@...rsen.net>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists