On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 01:43:51 +0400 Ilya Yanok <yanok@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Yuri Tikhonov <yur@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Should clear the next pointer of the TX if we are sure that the > next TX (say NXT) will be submitted to the channel too. Overwise, > we break the chain of descriptors, because we lose the information > about the next descriptor to run. So next time, when invoke > async_tx_run_dependencies() with TX, it's TX->next will be NULL, and > NXT will be never submitted. > > Signed-off-by: Yuri Tikhonov <yur@xxxxxxxxxxx> This patch should include your signed-off-by: as well. Because you were on the delivery path, as described in Documentation/SubmittingPatches, section 12. > > diff --git a/crypto/async_tx/async_tx.c b/crypto/async_tx/async_tx.c > index 85eaf7b..e8362c1 100644 > --- a/crypto/async_tx/async_tx.c > +++ b/crypto/async_tx/async_tx.c > @@ -137,7 +137,8 @@ async_tx_run_dependencies(struct dma_async_tx_descriptor *tx) > spin_lock_bh(&next->lock); > next->parent = NULL; > _next = next->next; > - next->next = NULL; > + if (_next && _next->chan == chan) > + next->next = NULL; > spin_unlock_bh(&next->lock); > > next->tx_submit(next); Dan, please review asap? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
