On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 18:28 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
quoted text
> On 11/10/2010 05:40 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > Your commit:
> >
> >      [SCSI] host lock push-down
> >
> >      Move the mid-layer's ->queuecommand() invocation from being locked
> >      with the host lock to being unlocked to facilitate speeding up the
> >      critical path for drivers who don't need this lock taken anyway.
> >
> >      The patch below presents a simple SCSI host lock push-down as an
> >      equivalent transformation.  No locking or other behavior should change
> >      with this patch.  All existing bugs and locking orders are preserved.
> >
> >      Minimal code disturbance was attempted with this change.  Most drivers
> >      needed only two one-line modifications for their host lock push-down.
> >
> >      Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik<jgarzik@redhat.com>
> >      Signed-off-by: James Bottomley<James.Bottomley@suse.de>
> >
> > has been added to the upstream SCSI tree
> > You can find it here:
> 
> No comments on renaming ->queuecommand to something else?

What we wondered about doing differently isn't really relevant for a
change log ... that should just really be about what was done (to avoid
confusion).

quoted text
> The consequences are rather dire if this goes unnoticed, yes?

You mean if there's a missed in-tree driver?  Yes, but I took care to
make sure all SCSI drivers were accounted for.  For out of tree drivers,
as with the eh lock push down, it's caveat emptor.

James


--
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/