http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8213 --- Comment #4 from Anonymous Emailer <anonymous@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-08-29 16:14:02 --- Reply-To: James.Bottomley@xxxxxxx On Sat, 2009-08-29 at 09:29 +0000, bugzilla-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > i`m curious how this report sits here unnoticed for so long. does that still > apply? It predates the time we placed SCSI bugs directly on the mailing list and buslogic has no maintainer, so no-one noticed > WRT MAINTAINERS file, there seems no special maintainer for buslogic driver. > i`d bring that up on linux-scsi ML. If I look at the original report: > Block comment before function BusLogic_WriteOutgoingMailbox says "The Host > Adapter's Lock should already have been acquired by the caller." > > > But in the following call chain, NO lock is acquired: > BusLogic_WriteOutgoingMailbox <- BusLogic_QueueCommand > <- scsi_log_send > <- scsi_dispatch_cmd > <- scsi_request_fn This analysis is incorrect. scsi_log_send() doesn't call queuecommand; all it does is print out the queuecommand value as a function pointer, so no lock is needed. > In some others such as: > BusLogic_WriteOutgoingMailbox <- BusLogic_QueueCommand <- scsi_send_eh_cmnd > BusLogic_WriteOutgoingMailbox <- BusLogic_QueueCommand <- scsi_dispatch_cmd > BusLogic_WriteOutgoingMailbox <- BusLogic_QueueCommand <- scsi_log_send <- > scsi_send_eh_cmnd > > a lock IS held. Right, *every* actual invocation of queuecommand holds the lock, so this bug report is invalid. James -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching the assignee of the bug.-- 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
