Re: f_ops flag to speed up compatible ioctls in linux kernel

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

Hello!
Quoting r. Albert Cahalan (albert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) "Re: f_ops flag to speed up compatible ioctls in linux kernel":
> Michael S. Tsirkin writes:
> > Quoting Lee Revell [snip -- that was excessive]
> 
> >> By adding a new ioctl you are adding a new use of
> >> the BKL. It has been suggested on dri-devel that
> >> this should be fixed.  Is this even possible?
> >
> > I dont know - can the lock be released before the
> > call to filp->f_op->ioctl ?
> >
> > I assume the reason its there is for legacy
> > code - existing ioctls may be assuming the BKL
> > is taken, but maybe there could be another flag
> > in f_ops to let sys_ioctl release the lock before
> > doing the call ...
> >
> > Like this - would that be safe?
> 
> Yes. It is proven to work.

Now that I look at the ioctl.c code, I see a several get_user/put_user
inside the ioctl which are thus done while BKL is held.
But I thought get_user can block?

Why is this not a bug?

MST
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/