On 05/07/15 14:34, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 05/04/15 14:42, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
+ spin_lock(&port_group_lock);
+ pg = kzalloc(sizeof(struct alua_port_group), GFP_ATOMIC);
+ if (!pg) {
+ sdev_printk(KERN_WARNING, sdev,
+ "%s: kzalloc port group failed\n",
+ ALUA_DH_NAME);
+ /* Temporary failure, bypass */
+ spin_unlock(&port_group_lock);
+ return SCSI_DH_DEV_TEMP_BUSY;
+ }
+ pg->group_id = group_id;
+ pg->buff = pg->inq;
+ pg->bufflen = ALUA_INQUIRY_SIZE;
+ pg->tpgs = h->tpgs;
+ pg->state = TPGS_STATE_OPTIMIZED;
+ kref_init(&pg->kref);
+ list_add(&pg->node, &port_group_list);
+ h->pg = pg;
+ spin_unlock(&port_group_lock);
Sorry but it's not clear to me why the kzalloc() statement happens under
port_group_lock. Please consider to perform only the list_add()
statement under port_group_lock, to perform all other assignments
without holding that lock and to change GFP_ATOMIC into GFP_KERNEL.
(replying to my own e-mail)
Hello Hannes,
Is it correct that port_group_list is only accessed from thread context
? If so, has it been considered to change port_group_lock into a mutex
instead ?
Thanks,
Bart.
--
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
