On Fri, 27 May 2005, James Bottomley wrote:
On Thu, 2005-05-26 at 16:19 -0700, Andrew Vasquez wrote:
Please apply, this should go in before 2.6.12 is released.
I've got it in the rc-fixes tree for scsi. However:
+ spin_unlock(&ha->hardware_lock);
Should be spin_unlock_irq(&ha->hardware_lock); shouldn't it? Otherwise we could sleep with interrupts disabled and the kernel now squeaks about that.
The ha->hardware_lock is obtained without spin_lock_irq(), so that's correct.
The statement immediately following that one is spin_lock_irq(host_lock)
Yes, with the latest changes being proposed/implemented by Jeff G., there would need to be some additional massaging of the driver's eh_*() routines.
No, I think James was under the impression that ha->hardware_lock was obtained with spin_lock_irq()
Jeff, could you drop the qla2xxx driver from your scrubing host_lock-free changes. I'll go ahead and post an updated patch following the patches in my queue.
I'll filter them out appropriately. It's easier to leave in ATM, since the changes are off on an unofficial dev branch noone cares about.
Jeff
- : 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
