On Monday 23 June 2008, Elias Oltmanns wrote:
quoted text
> Elias Oltmanns <eo@nebensachen.de> wrote:
> [...]
> > @@ -941,6 +949,7 @@ static ide_startstop_t atapi_reset_pollfunc (ide_drive_t *drive)
> >  	/* done polling */
> >  	hwgroup->polling = 0;
> >  	hwgroup->resetting = 0;
> 
> Actually, ->resetting needs to be protected by the ide_lock here.
> 
> [...]
> > @@ -1005,6 +1014,8 @@ static ide_startstop_t reset_pollfunc (ide_drive_t *drive)
> >  	}
> >  	hwgroup->polling = 0;	/* done polling */
> >  	hwgroup->resetting = 0; /* done reset attempt */
> 
> Same as above.  Unless I have missed something, a simple
> 
> spin_lock(&ide_lock)
> 
> should suffice since there cannot possibly be another interrupt that
> changes ->resetting behind our back.  I'll send an updated version of
> patches 1 and 4 once I have your opinion on the current series.

With patch #1 we may as well just remove ->resetting and allow the next
reset request to be added to the queue.
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/