http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11898 ------- Comment #26 from anonymous@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2008-11-06 06:58 ------- Reply-To: James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx On Wed, 2008-11-05 at 18:19 -0800, bugme-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > ------- Comment #25 from yanmin_zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2008-11-05 18:19 ------- > Created an attachment (id=18697) --> (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=18697&action=view) > --> (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=18697&action=view) > Here is the patch to fix it against 2.6.28-rc3. > > I tested the patch on my 2 machines and it does fix the issue. The problem is that it doesn't fix the theoretical tight loop, so someone else will run into the issue under more trying circumstances. The only reason a patch which conditionally NULLs starved_head works over one that does it absolutely should be that there's some other loop that requires it being set to effect a break out. James -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. -- To unsubscribe from this list: 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
