Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: [PATCH] ide: use queue lock instead of ide_lock when possible > > This is just a preparation for future changes and there should be no > functional changes caused by this patch since ide_lock is currently > also used as queue lock. > > Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@xxxxxxxxx> > --- [...] > Index: b/drivers/ide/ide-io.c > =================================================================== > --- a/drivers/ide/ide-io.c > +++ b/drivers/ide/ide-io.c [...] > @@ -1469,16 +1470,16 @@ out: > void ide_do_drive_cmd(ide_drive_t *drive, struct request *rq) > { > ide_hwgroup_t *hwgroup = drive->hwif->hwgroup; > + struct request_queue *q = drive->queue; > unsigned long flags; > > hwgroup->rq = NULL; > > - spin_lock_irqsave(&ide_lock, flags); > - __elv_add_request(drive->queue, rq, ELEVATOR_INSERT_FRONT, 1); > - __generic_unplug_device(drive->queue); > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ide_lock, flags); > + spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags); > + __elv_add_request(q, rq, ELEVATOR_INSERT_FRONT, 1); > + __generic_unplug_device(q); By the way, wouldn't blk_run_queue() be more appropriate here? It looks to me as if blk_run_queue() was the thing intended for general usage by low level drivers who don't know and care about schedulers, whereas the usage of __generic_unplug_device() should mostly be restricted to the block layer. On the other hand, there are other drivers in drivers/block/ that use __generic_unplug_device(), so I may well be wrong. Jens? Regards, Elias -- 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