On 16/10/2015 13:55, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Monday 12 October 2015 23:20:25 John Garry wrote:
@@ -804,6 +818,16 @@ static irqreturn_t int_phyup_v1_hw(int irq_no, void *p)
phy->identify.target_port_protocols =
SAS_PROTOCOL_SMP;
+ wq = kmalloc(sizeof(*wq), GFP_ATOMIC);
+ if (!wq)
+ goto end;
+
+ wq->event = PHYUP;
+ wq->hisi_hba = hisi_hba;
+ wq->phy_no = phy_no;
+
+ INIT_WORK(&wq->work_struct, hisi_sas_wq_process);
+ queue_work(hisi_hba->wq, &wq->work_struct);
end:
hisi_sas_phy_write32(hisi_hba, phy_no, CHL_INT2,
While rereading some other parts of the code, I stumbled over this piece.
You should generally not allocate work structs dynamically. Why not embed
the work struct inside of the phy structure and then just queue that?
Arnd
.
It could be considered.
A potential issue I see is with hisi_sas_control_phy() for
PHY_FUNC_HARD_RESET: this allocates a hisi_sas_wq struct and processes
the reset in the queue work. When we re-enable the phy for the reset,
the phyup irq will want to use the same hisi_sas_wq struct which may be
in use.
hisi_sas_control_phy() is added in 23/35.
John
--
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
