Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 6 Aug 2002 12:44:14 +0200 | From | Jens Axboe <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] 2.5.30 IDE 113 |
| |
On Tue, Aug 06 2002, Petr Vandrovec wrote: > > After all ide_raw_taskfile only gets used for REQ_SPECIAL request > > types. This does *not* contain normal data request from block IO. > > As of master slave issues - well we have the data pre allocated per > > device not per channel! If q->request_fn would properly return the > > error count instead of void, we could even get rid ot the > > checking for rq->errors after finishment... But well that's > > entierly different story. > > For example do_cmd_ioctl() invokes ide_raw_taskfile, without any locking. > Two programs, both issuing HDIO_DRIVE_CMD at same time, will compete > over one drive->srequest struct: you'll get same drive->srequest structure > submitted twice to blk_insert_request (hm, Jens, will this trigger > BUG, or will this just damage request list?).
Just silently damage request list. We _could_ easily add code to detect this, but it's not been a problem in the past so not worth looking for.
AFAICS, Petr is completely right wrt this race.
-- 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/
| |