lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH git latest] drivers/scsi: fixing wrong comment before new_buffer_tape()
    >> Removing the wrong comment.
    >> The lock is needed before calling new_tape_buffer(), at least in some cases.
    >> So the comment above new_tape_buffer() is inconsistent with the code and
    >> may mislead developers.
    >>
    >> I simply removed the wrong comment, as I am not sure if the lock is required
    >> in all situations. If so, we should add "Caller must hold os_scsi_tapes_lock".
    >>
    >> Signed-off-by: Lin Tan <tammy000@gmail.com>
    >
    > Looks true to me for the current versions of the code. In fact it is only
    > ever called from the initialisation function that I can see so chunks of
    > the code could simply go away as well as bits of the comment. Ditto the
    > one in drivers/scsi/st.c
    >
    > Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>
    >

    I am sorry I didn't quite understand. You mean it is true that caller
    must hold os_scsi_tapes_lock?

    new_tape_buffer in drivers/scsi/st.c is called without the lock, but
    the new_tape_buffer in drivers/scsi/osst.c
    is called with the lock. Both comments says no lock is needed. Should
    the two new_tap_buffer functions have similar usage?

    BTW, I am on the mailing list now, so I no longer need to be
    personally CC-ed. Thanks.

    Lin


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-09-26 18:07    [W:0.021 / U:29.660 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site