James Bottomley wrote:
On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 16:30 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
The ha->hardware_lock is obtained without spin_lock_irq(), so that's
correct.
Yes, that was my confusion
But ... I wish you hadn't pointed it out. Now I look at the driver, the
ha->hardware_lock is taken at interrupt level (in the interrupt
routines).
However, this sequence of code:
spin_unlock_irq(ha->host->host_lock);
spin_lock(&ha->hardware_lock);
Enables interrupts then takes this lock. If we ever get a qla interrupt
before we drop the ha->hardware_lock again, that will be a classic
deadlock.
Agreed, this was my analysis as well.
This driver appears to get locking -backwards-:
it uses spin_lock_irqsave() in interrupt handler.
it does not use spin_lock_irqsave() outside interrupt handler.
IMO this is a 2.6.12-rc issue...
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
