Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 15 Mar 2003 16:11:28 -0500 (EST) | From | Zwane Mwaikambo <> | Subject | Re: Any hope for ide-scsi (error handling)? |
| |
On Sat, 15 Mar 2003, Willem Riede wrote:
> Indeed. If you get there, the command in progress is hung. > To be able to restart the device, the old command needs to be > aborted. But that is an inherently racy undertaking. > > Nominally, I just want to set HWGROUP(drive)->handler = NULL. > But there is a small chance, that there is actually (interrupt) > activity going on for the command, which would result in a new > entry in HWGROUP(drive)->handler popping up after it is cleared. > > The loop as programmed significantly increases the odds that > the old command is really aborted. > > It may not be elegant to schedule(1) with the lock taken, but it > does work. > > However, my latest patch doesn't seem to be applied, since in my > version I have a set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); before > the schedule.
Yeah but what happens when a task tries to acquire ide_lock? Incidentally this one crept in via timer softirq so if ide_timer_expiry gets there before your scheduled timeout timer?
NMI Watchdog detected LOCKUP on CPU0, eip c02be73d, registers: CPU: 0 EIP: 0060:[<c02be73d>] Tainted: PF EFLAGS: 00000086 EIP is at .text.lock.ide_io+0x40/0x93
Call Trace: [<c03557e1>] i8042_timer_func+0x21/0x30 [<c02bdcc0>] ide_timer_expiry+0x0/0x310
-- function.linuxpower.ca - 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/
| |