lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Apr]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: pre-2.1.96-1 panic: Inactive in scsi_request_queueable
Date
On Tue, 14 Apr 1998 16:18:46 -0700 (PDT), 
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> wrote:
>No. The lock is not protecting any filesystem, it is _only_ protecting the
>actual IO request. It's quite ok to drop the lock, although I've told
>people who are worried about latency issues to no worry about those yet,
>as we have the bigger picture of correctness that is the first priority.
>
>You can drop the lock whenever you don't access any io-request lists, and
>when you aren't mucking around with any data structures (and aren't
>caching any data structure info).

Colour me confused :). If the lock can be dropped when we don't access
any io-request lists, why is it held on entry to dev->request_fn? If
it is safe to drop the lock during loopback, it should be safe to drop
it before any request_fn and reacquire only when needed.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:42    [W:2.454 / U:0.020 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site