Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: [PATCH] ide: replace the global ide_lock spinlock by per-hwgroup spinlocks > > Now that (almost) all host drivers have been fixed not to abuse ide_lock > and core code usage of ide_lock has been sanitized we may safely replace > ide_lock by per-hwgroup locks. > > This patch is partially based on earlier patch from Ravikiran G Thirumalai. > > While at it: > - don't use deprecated HWIF() and HWGROUP() macros > - update locking documentation in ide.h > > Cc: Vaibhav V. Nivargi <vaibhav.nivargi@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Alok N. Kataria <alokk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Ravikiran Thirumalai <kiran@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Shai Fultheim <shai@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > this is against 2.6.27 + pata tree + pre-patchset posted on Wednesday > (http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/10/8/221) I've only had a casual look at this patch, but there is one thing: [...] > Index: b/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c > =================================================================== > --- a/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c > +++ b/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c [...] > @@ -1091,11 +1092,11 @@ static int init_irq (ide_hwif_t *hwif) > * linked list, the first entry is the hwif that owns > * hwgroup->handler - do not change that. > */ > - spin_lock_irq(&ide_lock); > + spin_lock_irq(&hwgroup->lock); > hwif->next = hwgroup->hwif->next; > hwgroup->hwif->next = hwif; > BUG_ON(hwif->next == hwif); > - spin_unlock_irq(&ide_lock); > + spin_unlock_irq(&hwgroup->lock); > } else { > hwgroup = kmalloc_node(sizeof(*hwgroup), GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_ZERO, > hwif_to_node(hwif)); Something like spin_lock_init(&hwgroup->lock); should go into this else clause too. 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
