From: John Kacur <jkacur@redhat.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Vincent Sanders <vince@simtec.co.uk>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>,
Greg Ungerer <gerg@uclinux.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Koichi Yasutake <yasutake.koichi@jp.panasonic.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/6 RFC] Remove the BKL from sys_execve on various architectures
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 00:32:59 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0910130021440.3658@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
Most of the mainstream architectures such as x86, x86-64 and ppc, do not
use the bkl in sys_execve.
All of the architectures that still use it, look like copy-and-pastes from
a time when the mainstream architectures did use it. In addition, all of
the call-outs appear to be to generic functions that are safe to use
without the bkl. Therefore, I believe it should be safe to simply remove.
However, the bkl does some surprising things, and I could be wrong. So
please have a look at let us know if there is a reason why your
architecture does indeed need the bkl in sys_execve.
Even better, grab the relevant patch and do some testing and report back.
Thank you in advance.
John Kacur
next reply other threads:[~2009-10-12 22:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-12 22:32 John Kacur [this message]
2009-10-12 22:55 ` Frederic Weisbecker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.2.00.0910130021440.3658@localhost.localdomain \
--to=jkacur@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=gerg@uclinux.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vapier@gentoo.org \
--cc=vince@simtec.co.uk \
--cc=yasutake.koichi@jp.panasonic.com \
--cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
--cc=zippel@linux-m68k.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®