On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Will Newton wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 2:44 AM, Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Right...maybe not problem merging those two functions. >>> But think not use list_add_tail(&slot->queue_node, &host->queue).. >>> >>> I want to know when use list_add_tail functions..in this code. >> >> I think that code is from the original NXP driver and appears to be >> used to support multiple slots attached to the same block (so you can >> be asked to process a request for slot A while the block is busy >> processing an earlier request for slot B). I don't have any hardware >> setup like this, everything I have has only a single slot so I don't >> believe I have ever seen that branch of the conditional execute. > > Oh..i also used only single slot..i want to remove spinlock_bh().. > because if we used a only single slot, i think that spinlock_bh() not need.. > how think about this? I'm not convinced that removing the multiple slot functionality will allow you to remove the spin_lock_bh, it looks like the lock may be protecting more than just the queue. Why do you want to remove the spinlock? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
