From: Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>
To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <B.Zolnierkiewicz@elka.pw.edu.pl>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>,
linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PATCH: switch ide-proc to use the ide_key functionality
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 08:06:22 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040817120622.GF3204@devserv.devel.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200408171248.12235.bzolnier@elka.pw.edu.pl>
On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 12:48:12PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > Which means my cunning plan from the previous mail doesn't actually work
> > unless we take ide_cfg_sem at the top of the proc code before setting_sem.
> > Also looking over it I need to send you the bits to take the sems in each
> > proc routine for that case.
>
> Yes, on the other hand we may try to do real refcounting.
refcounting doesn't solve the need for keys however due to the way procfs works
I've fixed the keys in my tree by taking the cfg/settings sem for all those
proc functions. I've also done it for the hwif level proc functions.
I'll have a look at what occurs if we make the ->key functions ref count
and add "put" functions. I think that can be made to work cleanly without
changing the rest of the code to refcounts at the same time. It'll still need
some locking because of the memset. We would still have keys but we'd
refcount usage off them as a starting point.
> more about it - i.e. what protects us from removing hwif while it is being
> configured by host driver?
A hwif is only removed by the owner. Thus for the PCI devices it is
protected by higher level serializing.
> I also can't see how sysfs can help with synchronizing writes to ISA/PCI
> config space with ongoing I/O?
The question is do we need it ?
Alan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-08-17 12:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-15 15:04 PATCH: switch ide-proc to use the ide_key functionality Alan Cox
2004-08-16 15:24 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2004-08-16 15:30 ` Alan Cox
2004-08-16 23:22 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2004-08-16 23:35 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2004-08-17 0:13 ` Alan Cox
2004-08-17 0:31 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2004-08-17 0:41 ` Alan Cox
2004-08-17 1:05 ` Alan Cox
2004-08-17 10:48 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2004-08-17 12:06 ` Alan Cox [this message]
2004-08-17 22:15 ` Alan Cox
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040817120622.GF3204@devserv.devel.redhat.com \
--to=alan@redhat.com \
--cc=B.Zolnierkiewicz@elka.pw.edu.pl \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).