lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [May]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] 2.5.15 IDE 61
Uz.ytkownik Neil Conway napisa?:
> Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
>>There is no problem to go in paralell on different channels for
>>requests. The serialization has only to be done
>>for the drive setup.
>
>
> I agree for general chipsets, but my whole point was with regard to
> buggy chipsets which need to be serialized on both channels.
>
> If you're saying that even these broken chipsets are OK with having
> transfers on one channel while setting up transfers on another channel,
> then perhaps you are right but that's not what I believed to be the case
> (can't find info to tell me either way right now).
>
> But if that really were the case, then how could the (e.g.) cmd640
> problem ever have been manifested? A spinlock is ALWAYS held while
> ide_do_request is executing. Even if it weren't, only an SMP machine
> could be trying to program both channels simultaneously because
> interrupts are disabled too.


Well in the next patch round the hwgroup will be replaced with
a spin lock, which is supposed to be shared between channels which need
forced access serialization between them. Please look
at patches 62a and 63 :-).


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:26    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site