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 [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
