On 6/15/2011 10:25 AM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
On Wed, 2011-06-15 at 10:22 -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Nicholas A. Bellinger
<nab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Btw, I think the same type of conversion may need to happen for
transport_lookup_tmr_lun() as well, as I believe qla_target.c can call
this directly from interrupt context in certain situations.
Yes, I think I sent another mail about this... the reason I didn't just
send a patch is that transport_lookup_tmr_lun() ends with:
spin_lock(&se_tmr->tmr_dev->se_tmr_lock);
list_add_tail(&se_tmr->tmr_list,&se_tmr->tmr_dev->dev_tmr_list);
spin_unlock(&se_tmr->tmr_dev->se_tmr_lock);
and indeed se_tmr_lock looks like it is taken with bare spin_lock()
in lots of places.
Actually, it's only two places: core_tmr_release_req() and
core_tmr_lun_reset()
Presumably se_tmr_lock is taken from process context sometimes?
So we would need to convert all those spin_lock()s to spin_lock_irq()
(or irqsave I guess).
Correct, both of the above are only every called from process context,
so a simple conversion to spin_lock_irq() for these two, and
spin_lock_irqsave() in transport_lookup_tmr_lun() should by sufficent..
Likewise, we need to do same change in function
"transport_get_lun_for_tmr", specifically for tmr_lock. Please correct
me if I am missing anything.
--nab
--
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
Thanks,
-- Kiran P.
--
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
