• I
    [PATCH] enable PREEMPT_BKL on !PREEMPT+SMP too · f704f56a
    Ingo Molnar 提交于
    The only sane way to clean up the current 3 lock_kernel() variants seems to
    be to remove the spinlock-based BKL implementations altogether, and to keep
    the semaphore-based one only.  If we dont want to do that for whatever
    reason then i'm afraid we have to live with the current complexity.  (but
    i'm open for other cleanup suggestions as well.)
    
    To explore this possibility we'll (at a minimum) have to know whether the
    semaphore-based BKL works fine on plain SMP too.  The patch below enables
    this.
    
    The patch may make sense in isolation as well, as it might bring
    performance benefits: code that would formerly spin on the BKL spinlock
    will now schedule away and give up the CPU.  It might introduce performance
    regressions as well, if any performance-critical code uses the BKL heavily
    and gets overscheduled due to the semaphore.  I very much hope there is no
    such performance-critical codepath left though.
    Signed-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
    Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
    Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
    f704f56a
Kconfig.preempt 754 字节