Re: [PATCH] libata: remove ata_sff_data_xfer_noirq()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2018-05-07 17:52:16 [+0200], To Tejun Heo wrote:
> On 2018-05-07 08:49:08 [-0700], Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Hello, Sebastian.
Hi Tejun,

> > On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 05:06:20PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > > ata_sff_data_xfer_noirq() is invoked via the ->sff_data_xfer hook. The
> > > latter is invoked by ata_pio_sector(), atapi_send_cdb() and
> > > __atapi_pio_bytes() which in turn is invoked by ata_sff_hsm_move().
> > > The latter function requires that the "ap->lock" lock is held which
> > > needs to be taken with disabled interrupts.
> > > 
> > > There is no need have to have ata_sff_data_xfer_noirq() which invokes
> > > ata_sff_data_xfer32() with disabled interrupts because at this point the
> > > interrupts are already disabled.
> > > Remove the function and its references to it and replace all callers
> > > with ata_sff_data_xfer32().
> > 
> > Can you please add irq disabled assert to ata_sff_data_xfer*()?
> 
> Why irq-disabled assert? Can we use lockdep_assert_held() instead?
That irq-disabled assert won't work on RT as expected that is why I
intend to remove the local_irq_save() (which is not needed). If we could
avoid the irq-disabled assert or use a lock instead, then it wouldn't
trigger another error on RT.

> > Thanks.

Sebastian
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux RAID]     [Git]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Newbie]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux