Should we be using CONFIG_PREEMPT_BKL in the Fedora kernel?

[Dave Jones]

On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 03:04:02PM -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
 > On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 15:01 -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
 > > I get the feeling that some of the bugs we are seeing is because
 > > we have enabled CONFIG_PREEMPT_BKL. I remember looking at the
 > > code when it came out and thinking it was too scary to enable,
 > > so I never did in my own vanilla kernels.
 > 
 > Well, it's likely to remain around upstream so surely it's better to fix
 > bugs and feed them back upstream than ignore this, it'll just be painful
 > later on IMO :-)

A few times, I've disabled an option like this in an update as
an experiment just to see if "weirdo" bugs 'go away' or not.
And then see if it comes back when I reenable it in a further update.

It can be useful to pinpoint problems this way, but yes, the
bug wants fixing ultimately.

	Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk