Should we be using CONFIG_PREEMPT_BKL in the Fedora kernel?

[Dave Jones]

On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 03:10:32PM -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
 > 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 :-)
 > > 
 > 
 > Well yeah, but it's optional. We don't enable CONFIG_PREEMPT and that's
 > been there for a long time...

Which bugs in particular were you thinking might be caused by this?
There's not that much generic code left under BKL these days anyway is there?
And as for drivers.. just ioctls ?

	Dave

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