Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 5 Jun 2002 17:52:41 +0200 | From | Jens Axboe <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] 2.5.20 IDE 85 |
| |
On Wed, Jun 05 2002, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Wed, Jun 05 2002, Martin Dalecki wrote: > > Jens Axboe wrote: > > >On Wed, Jun 05 2002, Martin Dalecki wrote: > > > > > >AFAICS, you just introduced some nasty list races in the interrupt > > >handlers. You must hold the queue locks when calling > > >blkdev_dequeue_request() and end_that_request_last(), for instance. > > > > > > > No. Please be more accurate. Becouse: > > > > 1. If anything I have made existing races only "obvious". > > If anything, you've made a race you introduced earlier more obvious. > > > 2. It is called in the context of do_ide_request or ide_raw_taskfile > > where we already have the lock. > > ?? Both tcq and ata_special_intr look like interrupt handlers to me.
BTW, I wanted to look at the code (and not just read the patch), but it's not clear from the patch what it is against. Where do you keep older patches so I can get them? Maybe the ide code could do with a bit of peer review :-)
-- Jens Axboe
- 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/
| |