On 13-09-26 09:03 AM, Alexander Gordeev wrote: > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 08:32:53AM -0400, Mark Lord wrote: >> On 13-09-18 05:48 AM, Alexander Gordeev wrote: >>> The last pattern makes most of sense to me and could be updated with a more >>> clear sequence - a call to (bit modified) pci_msix_table_size() followed >>> by a call to pci_enable_msix(). I think this pattern can effectively >>> supersede the currently recommended "loop" practice. >> >> The loop is still necessary, because there's a race between those two calls, >> so that pci_enable_msix() can still fail due to lack of MSIX slots. > > Moreover, the existing loop pattern is racy and could fail just as easily ;) Yes, but it then loops again to correct things. > But (1) that is something drivers should expect and (2) there is basically > nothing to race against - that is probably the reason it has not been a > problem for pSeries. So I think we should not care about this. I always care about race conditions. -- 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
