Hi Chetan, > Alok, > > (This is just a optimization.You don't need it in order to get your > code merged upstream.You can always patch it later on)In fact hw_lock > should be split into two locks - > > req_path_lock(aka tx_lock) and > cmpl_path_lock(aka rx_lock). > > You can then have a full-duplex channel. > > Revised-code - > ::pvscsi_acquire_context->spin_lock_irqsave(tx_lock) > ::pvscsi_isr->spin_lock_irqsave(rx_lock) > ::some_future_napi_style_pvrx_poll_func->spin_lock_irqsave(rx_lock) > > ::for aborts synchronize on the rx_lock so that you know what's > completed and what's not. > I agree about the optimization. Though IMO this will be more attractive once we have a device which supports multiple queue pairs. Anyways, let me keep this on my plate, I will check how much of an benefit this gets us and will decide if this should be done, but as you suggested this is for later. Thanks for taking a look. --Alok > This is the kind of common code that should be provided by the bottom > edge of the scsi-layer so that all the scsi-LLDD's can split their > tx/rx paths! > -- 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
