Re: [patch-2.4.0-test5] microcode_release needs no BKL.

From: Matti Aarnio (matti.aarnio@zmailer.org)
Date: Fri Jul 28 2000 - 10:22:08 EST

On Fri, Jul 28, 2000 at 04:18:10PM +0100, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> Hi Linus,
>
> Someone seems to have added lock/unlock_kernel to
> arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c:microcode_release() without giving it due
> consideration. The patch below puts it back to how it was before.

        Please don't.

        Having those calls there (if only as comment text) reminds
        of their need when next person comes around to look model
        from those parts for their own beast of similar manner.

> Regards,
> Tigran
>
> --- linux/arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c Fri Jul 14 20:52:14 2000
> +++ work/arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c Fri Jul 28 16:15:20 2000
> @@ -147,9 +147,7 @@
>
> static int microcode_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> {
> - lock_kernel();
> clear_bit(MICROCODE_IS_OPEN, &microcode_status);
> - unlock_kernel();
> return 0;
> }
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 31 2000 - 21:00:27 EST