[lkml]   [2005]   [Apr]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [OOPS] 2.6.11 - NMI lockup with CFQ scheduler
On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 15:32 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> I think Christophs point is that why add sdev_lock as a pointer, instead
> of just killing it? It's only used in one location, so it's not really
> that confusing (and a comment could fix that).

Because any use of sdev->request_queue->queue_lock would likely succeed
even after we've freed the device and released the queue. If it's a
pointer and we null it after free and release, then any later use will
trigger an immediate NULL deref oops.

Since we've had so many nasty problems around refcounting, I just would
like to assure myself that we're doing everything correctly (I really
believe we are, but empirical evidence is also nice).


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: 2005-04-07 15:45    [W:0.030 / U:8.156 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site