Re: [GIT PATCH] TTY patches for 2.6.33-git

[Alan Cox]

> I think we could possibly add a "__might_sleep()" to _lock_kernel(). It 
> doesn't really sleep, but it's invalid to take the kernel lock in an 
> atomic region, so __might_sleep() might be the right thing anyway.

It's only invalid if you don't already hold the lock. The old tty code
worked because every path into tty_fasync already held the lock ! That
specific case - taking it the first time should definitely
__might_sleep().

Mind you it's probably still rather dumb and would be a good debugging
aid for -next to be able to warn on all offences if only to catch this
stuff for the future BKL removal work.

Alan
--
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/