On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 16:31 -0500, David Dillow wrote: > We don't need protection against the SCSI stack, so use our own lock to > allow parallel progress on separate CPUs. > @@ -1126,7 +1125,7 @@ static int srp_queuecommand(struct Scsi_Host *shost, struct scsi_cmnd *scmnd) > return 0; > } > > - spin_lock_irqsave(shost->host_lock, flags); > + spin_lock_irqsave(&target->lock, flags); > /* This goes away once the scsi_eh routines stop testing it. */ > scsi_cmd_get_serial(shost, scmnd); > iu = __srp_get_tx_iu(target, SRP_IU_CMD); This one may be a bit problematic -- I need to look at the required locking to avoid a race with the serial number. Of course, there's an easy fix -- if this patch lands after the patches to remove the serial number check from the error handler, then there's no reason to get a serial number in the initiator. -- 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
