lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] scsi_lib.c: sleeping function called from invalid context
From
Date
On Tue, 2009-10-06 at 12:30 +0000, iceberg wrote:
> James, what about code where spin_unlock is called before scsi_device_put,
> especially for avoiding atomic context?
> In code like
> spin_unlock
> scsi_device_put
> spin_lock
> Is spin_unlock/spin_lock redundant?

Depends on context ... most of them are actually swapping locks or
providing pre-emption points ... it could be redundant, but doesn't have
to be.

> Why do we need scsi_device_get/scsi_device_put pair in scsi_lib.c at all? If
> we are sure that scsi_device_put is always not last, for what purpose do we
> call it together with scsi_device_get in the loop?

We're not sure (and never can be in a hotplug world) that any put isn't
the last one.

James




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-10-06 16:01    [W:0.586 / U:0.344 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site