On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 18:28 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > On 11/10/2010 05:40 PM, James Bottomley wrote: > > Your commit: > > > > [SCSI] host lock push-down > > > > Move the mid-layer's ->queuecommand() invocation from being locked > > with the host lock to being unlocked to facilitate speeding up the > > critical path for drivers who don't need this lock taken anyway. > > > > The patch below presents a simple SCSI host lock push-down as an > > equivalent transformation. No locking or other behavior should change > > with this patch. All existing bugs and locking orders are preserved. > > > > Minimal code disturbance was attempted with this change. Most drivers > > needed only two one-line modifications for their host lock push-down. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik<jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: James Bottomley<James.Bottomley@xxxxxxx> > > > > has been added to the upstream SCSI tree > > You can find it here: > > No comments on renaming ->queuecommand to something else? What we wondered about doing differently isn't really relevant for a change log ... that should just really be about what was done (to avoid confusion). > The consequences are rather dire if this goes unnoticed, yes? You mean if there's a missed in-tree driver? Yes, but I took care to make sure all SCSI drivers were accounted for. For out of tree drivers, as with the eh lock push down, it's caveat emptor. James -- 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
