User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Might 2.6.35 be BKL-free?

Might 2.6.35 be BKL-free?

Posted Apr 29, 2010 9:16 UTC (Thu) by arnd (subscriber, #8866)
Parent article: Might 2.6.35 be BKL-free?

There is a wiki page at http://wiki.kernelnewbies.org/BigKernelLock describing the other things that still need to be fixed before we can build a kernel without the BKL. We have patches for all of them, but there are still complications in the block, tty and fs/locks areas.

Note that the idea of the new ->locked_ioctl() operations was to replace the existing ->ioctl() one before 2.6.35-rc1, they were not meant to exist in parallel beyond that.

Pushing the BKL down with the new patches achieves everything that this would have done, and more, so the extra work was well worth it.


(Log in to post comments)

Might 2.6.35 be BKL-free?

Posted May 8, 2010 17:50 UTC (Sat) by pixelpapst (subscriber, #55301) [Link]

> Pushing the BKL down with the new patches achieves everything that this would have done, and more, so the extra work was well worth it.

Is seems however there is some resistance to this on Linus' part:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/978691

Or maybe Linus is only referring to 2.6.34 here, not entirely sure.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds