Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | Jonathan Cameron <> | Subject | [PATCH 6/8] [SCSI] osduld: use ida_simple_get to handle id. | Date | Fri, 22 Jul 2011 17:41:24 +0100 |
| |
This does involve additional use of the spin lock in idr.c. Is this an issue?
Also, some error mangling was needed to keep the interface the same. Does this matter or can we return -ENOSPC instead of -EBUSY?
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@cam.ac.uk> --- drivers/scsi/osd/osd_uld.c | 22 ++++++++-------------- 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/osd/osd_uld.c b/drivers/scsi/osd/osd_uld.c index b31a8e3..fa849bd 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/osd/osd_uld.c +++ b/drivers/scsi/osd/osd_uld.c @@ -387,7 +387,7 @@ static void __remove(struct device *dev) if (oud->disk) put_disk(oud->disk); - ida_remove(&osd_minor_ida, oud->minor); + ida_simple_remove(&osd_minor_ida, oud->minor); kfree(oud); } @@ -403,18 +403,12 @@ static int osd_probe(struct device *dev) if (scsi_device->type != TYPE_OSD) return -ENODEV; - do { - if (!ida_pre_get(&osd_minor_ida, GFP_KERNEL)) - return -ENODEV; - - error = ida_get_new(&osd_minor_ida, &minor); - } while (error == -EAGAIN); - - if (error) - return error; - if (minor >= SCSI_OSD_MAX_MINOR) { - error = -EBUSY; - goto err_retract_minor; + minor = ida_simple_get(&osd_minor_ida, 0, + SCSI_OSD_MAX_MINOR, GFP_KERNEL); + if (minor < 0) { + if (minor == -ENOSPC) + return -EBUSY; + return minor; } error = -ENOMEM; @@ -491,7 +485,7 @@ err_free_osd: dev_set_drvdata(dev, NULL); kfree(oud); err_retract_minor: - ida_remove(&osd_minor_ida, minor); + ida_simple_remove(&osd_minor_ida, minor); return error; } -- 1.7.3.4
| |