On Thu, Apr 07 2005, James Bottomley wrote: > On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 15:32 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > > I think Christophs point is that why add sdev_lock as a pointer, instead > > of just killing it? It's only used in one location, so it's not really > > that confusing (and a comment could fix that). > > Because any use of sdev->request_queue->queue_lock would likely succeed > even after we've freed the device and released the queue. If it's a > pointer and we null it after free and release, then any later use will > trigger an immediate NULL deref oops. So clear ->request_queue instead. -- Jens Axboe - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
