James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > There is a potential improvement, in that could be done which is only to > use the workqueue if we're in atomic context. However, I elected to > leave playing with that cleanup until after 2.6.15 We don't have a way of determining whether we're in atomic context (in_atomic() only works with CONFIG_PREEMPT). If scsi internally knows what context things are in then that'll work OK. > There is also the point that I now have two of these allocations of > structures containing a workqueue and a pointer in separate instances. > It does look like this might be an improvement to the API (i.e. a > workqueue use that manages the allocation of the actual work_struct). Perhaps you could use work_struct.data for the scsi_target* and get back to the work_struct via container_of(). - : 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
