On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 08:58:57AM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote: > Fair enough... however that seems like a much more major project, > as eg the qla2xxx code does a fair bit from interrupt context. Yes, just pointing out in which direction it should go eventually. > > Also it seems even if we are running from thread context it would > be legitimate for a target driver to do > > spin_lock_irq(&internal_target_lock); > ... > transport_lookup_cmd_lun(); > ... > spin_unlock_irq > > and so transport_lookup_cmd_lun() shouldn't be reenabling IRQs > unconditionally. Yes. At that point we shouldn't require any irq locking, making life even easier. -- 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
