lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jan]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?
    From
    Date
    On Mon, 2003-01-13 at 03:33, Paul Mackerras wrote:
    > I'm using the patch below, which makes sure that ide_release (in
    > ide-cs.c) runs in process context not interrupt context. The specific
    > problem I saw was that ide_unregister calls various devfs routines
    > that don't like being called in interrupt context, but there may well
    > be other thing ide_unregister does that aren't safe in interrupt
    > context.

    The ide release code isnt safe in any context.

    > I have "fixed" the problem for now by adding a call to
    > init_hwif_data(index) in ide_register_hw just before the first
    > memcpy. I'd be interested to know what the right fix is. :)

    The code is currently written on the basis that people don't mangle
    free interfaces (the free up code restores stuff which I grant is
    kind of ass backwards). It also needs serious review and 2.5 testing
    before I'd want to move it to the right spot.


    Also note that freeing the IDE can fail. If it fails then the code
    should probably be a lot smarter. Right now it 'loses' the interface.
    Really it should set a timer and try again. It might also want to
    add a null iops (out does nothing in returns FFFFFFFF) to stop
    further I/O cycles.

    -
    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 13:32    [W:0.020 / U:1.700 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site