* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 1 May 2009, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > > This reiserfs patchset applies against latest > > tip:core/kill-the-BKL It adds various explicit write lock > > releases on specific sleeping sections. > > Btw, is there any reason why it cannot just be re-based on top of > standard -rc4? > > I'd love to pull a "reiserfs: remove bkl" branch when the next > merge window opens, but there's no way I'll pull the kill-bkl > thing with all the odd random tty stuff etc that is totally > unrelated. Btw., i can name another reason why we'd want to do reiserfs separately: if our testing and efforts are any proof, then reiser3 turned out to be the hardest BKL nut to crack, by a wide margin. All the other hacks in kill-the-BKL are really of relatively low complexity and really just tried to map out the problem areas. Even the tty ones are simple - just a few recursion assumptions. We _suspected_ that kind of status quo before, but we never had any conclusive proof of that. I think we now know that for sure, and we have to fear the BKL no more. After the reiser3 conversion we should just tackle all the other BKL users one by one, and go for a straight subsystem mutex in every case: it will cause little trouble, and it will be a job that can be finished within a reasonable time frame. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
