From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [PATCH] qla2xxx: fix bad locking during eh_abort Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 16:31:29 -0400 Message-ID: <1117225889.7379.25.camel@mulgrave> References: <20050526231938.GA31205@plap.qlogic.org> <1117224371.7379.21.camel@mulgrave> <20050527201831.GE16474@plap.qlogic.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from stat16.steeleye.com ([209.192.50.48]:30639 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262576AbVE0Ubo (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 May 2005 16:31:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20050527201831.GE16474@plap.qlogic.org> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Vasquez Cc: Jeff Garzik , Linux-SCSI Mailing List On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 13:18 -0700, Andrew Vasquez wrote: > Yes, with the latest changes being proposed/implemented by Jeff G., > there would need to be some additional massaging of the driver's > eh_*() routines. > > Are you planning on putting the host_lock-free changes in for -rc, > I figured that would be going into the next kernel rev. I mention > that because I have a block of patches which I have queued-up to add > new chip support to the driver. No ... we're too close to a real kernel to put something like that in. I'm just doing minimal essential bug fixes at the moment. James