[lkml]   [2003]   [Jun]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] nbd driver for 2.5+: fix locking issues with ioctl UI
Lou Langholtz wrote:

> . . . On the other hand I've been thinking that I might be able to
> take advantage of the irq locked condition imposed by the
> q->queue_lock and just use nbd_lock to replace q->queue_lock then. Al
> and Andrew seem to have a much deeper understanding though for
> spinlocking though so I'll defer to there comments on this idea (of
> replacing lo->queue_lock by use of nbd_lock). This has the added
> attraction of already having nbd_lock locked when in do_nbd_request.. . .

Typo! Above should have read "just use nbd_lock to replace
lo->queue_lock" (another spinlock_t per nbd_device). Anyways... would
using the one nbd_lock to also protect the lo->queue_list work better
than using the queue_lock per nbd_device I'm wondering. According to the
prior discusions about spinlocks this should be better. I don't have a
picture right now of wether that even works or not. Gotta run though,

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:36    [W:0.084 / U:0.324 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site