Re: [PATCH] sg: protect access to to 'reserved' page array

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 02:12:48PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> 
> This seems to be abusing an atomic bitflag as a lock.  And I think
> in general we have two different things here that this patch conflates:
> 
>  a) a lock to protect building and using the reserve lists
>  b) a flag is a reservations is in use

I did have a patch doing exactly that but (appart from lockdep complaints) we
decided to drop it, as it made the code even more confusing.

-- 
Johannes Thumshirn                                          Storage
jthumshirn@xxxxxxx                                +49 911 74053 689
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Key fingerprint = EC38 9CAB C2C4 F25D 8600 D0D0 0393 969D 2D76 0850
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]