On Monday 23 June 2008, Elias Oltmanns wrote: > Elias Oltmanns <eo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [...] > > @@ -941,6 +949,7 @@ static ide_startstop_t atapi_reset_pollfunc (ide_drive_t *drive) > > /* done polling */ > > hwgroup->polling = 0; > > hwgroup->resetting = 0; > > Actually, ->resetting needs to be protected by the ide_lock here. > > [...] > > @@ -1005,6 +1014,8 @@ static ide_startstop_t reset_pollfunc (ide_drive_t *drive) > > } > > hwgroup->polling = 0; /* done polling */ > > hwgroup->resetting = 0; /* done reset attempt */ > > Same as above. Unless I have missed something, a simple > > spin_lock(&ide_lock) > > should suffice since there cannot possibly be another interrupt that > changes ->resetting behind our back. I'll send an updated version of > patches 1 and 4 once I have your opinion on the current series. With patch #1 we may as well just remove ->resetting and allow the next reset request to be added to the queue. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
