Re: [Lse-tech] Re: [Patch 2/7] Add sysctl for schedstats

[Arjan van de Ven]

On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 16:16 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> <snip>
> > why not just introduce a schedstats_lock mutex, and acquire it for both 
> > the 'if (schedstats_sysctl)' line and the schedstats_set() line. That 
> > will make the locking meaningful: two parallel sysctl ops will be atomic 
> > to each other. [right now they wont be and they can clear schedstat data 
> > in parallel -> not a big problem but it makes schedstats_lock rather 
> > meaningless]
> >
> 
> Ingo,
> 
> Can sysctl's run in parallel? sys_sysctl() is protects the call
> to do_sysctl() with BKL (lock_kernel/unlock_kernel).
> 
> Am I missing something?


your sysctl functions sleep. the BKL is useless in the light of sleeping
code...


-
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/