lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/7] ide: ide_hwgroup_t.rq doesn't need an ide_lock held
    Date
    Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com> wrote:
    > From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
    > Subject: [PATCH] ide: ide_hwgroup_t.rq doesn't need an ide_lock held
    >
    > While at it:
    > - no need to check for hwgroup presence in ide_dump_opcode()
    >
    > Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
    > ---
    [...]
    > Index: b/drivers/ide/ide-io.c
    > ===================================================================
    > --- a/drivers/ide/ide-io.c
    > +++ b/drivers/ide/ide-io.c
    [...]
    > @@ -274,7 +269,11 @@ static void ide_complete_pm_request (ide
    > drive->dev_flags &= ~IDE_DFLAG_BLOCKED;
    > blk_start_queue(drive->queue);
    > }
    > - HWGROUP(drive)->rq = NULL;
    > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ide_lock, flags);
    > +
    > + drive->hwif->hwgroup->rq = NULL;
    > +
    > + spin_lock_irqsave(&ide_lock, flags);
    > if (__blk_end_request(rq, 0, 0))
    > BUG();
    > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ide_lock, flags);

    Is it really an improvement to release the lock here?

    Regards,

    Elias


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-10-10 10:51    [W:0.028 / U:2.144 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site