Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 8 May 2007 13:33:52 -0700 | | From | "Satyam Sharma" <> | | Subject | Re: nbd problem. |
| |
On 5/8/07, Rogier Wolff <R.E.Wolff@bitwizard.nl> wrote: > > Hi, > > The nbd client still reliably hangs when I use it. > > While looking into this, I found: > > > 446 req->errors = 0; > 447 spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock); > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
BTW (this could be unrelated to the original issue here), but can anybody ever have a _genuine_ excuse to use spin_lock_irq / spin_unlock_irq and not spin_lock_irqsave / spin_unlock_restore? I find the latter primitives more tasteful even when I *know* something is being called with interrupts enabled / disabled -- you never know when some code is re-used again somewhere else and/or ripped out of one place and put inside another ... the former API only invites trouble, if anything. - 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/
|  |