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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans