From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ravikiran G Thirumalai <kiran@scalex86.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] ide: Break ide_lock to per-hwgroup lock
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 11:16:54 -0700
Message-ID: <20050907181654.GB3769@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20050906233322.GA3642@localhost.localdomain> <1126112950.8928.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner+glk-linux-kernel-3=40m.gmane.org-S932188AbVIGSRF@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1126112950.8928.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Shai Fultheim (Shai@scalex86.org)" <shai@scalex86.org>, Alok Kataria <alokk@calsoftinc.com>
List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 06:09:10PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Maw, 2005-09-06 at 16:33 -0700, Ravikiran G Thirumalai wrote:
> > 2. Change the core ide code to use hwgroup->lock instead of ide_lock.
> > Deprecate ide_lock (patch 2)
> 
> hwgroups and IDE locking requirements are frequently completely
> unrelated. Its clear from the changes proposed you've not tested on real
> hardware for each case and you have not studied the documented errata

I tested it on a 2way box with a piix controller. It got through Bonnie++.  
I have access to piix controllers only, so that was the only controller 
I changed.  I did not read the errata though... :(

Do you think the approach is unsafe, even if the piix tune routine is
serialized with a per-driver lock?  Bartlomiej?

Thanks,
Kiran