On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 02:23:23PM -0700, Muthu Kumar wrote: > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Muthu Kumar <muthu.lkml@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 06/09/12 23:57, Muthu Kumar wrote: > >> > >>> Locking change is the one you posted already (the link above). Anyway, > >>> I have the attached patch *including* the locking change. Original > >>> mail has attachment without locking change. Please use whatever you > >>> need. > >> > >> > >> While we are at it ... the rq->rq_disk and rq->end_io assignments can be > >> performed safely before the spinlock is taken, isn't it ? > >> > > > > Yes.. that spinlock is to protect the q. > > > > Attached patch with assignment performed before taking the spinlock. This looks correct to me. Bart, can you please include this patch in your series and repost the series? Thank you. -- tejun -- 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
