From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@suse.de>
Cc: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@linux-iscsi.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Vasu Dev <vasu.dev@linux.intel.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>,
Mike Christie <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>,
James Smart <james.smart@emulex.com>,
Andrew Vasquez <andrew.vasquez@qlogic.com>,
FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>, Joe Eykholt <jeykholt@cisco.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] scsi: Drop struct Scsi_Host->host_lock around SHT->queuecommand()
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 05:20:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100917032021.GB25217@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1284691571.26423.50.camel@mulgrave.site>
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 10:46:11PM -0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> So at least from where I stand, my object is to reduce the number of
> times we take and release the lock, which this doesn't do. As I said
> before: we need to figure out the rest, which likely includes an atomic
> for the serial number (which is almost unused). I think the check
> against SHOST_DEL is fine unlocked.
The check by itself for sure is. But I wonder whether we make any
assumptions about it not changing while we are in ->queuecommand, which
isn't nessecarily the case after this patch.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-17 3:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-16 22:35 [PATCH 1/8] scsi: Drop struct Scsi_Host->host_lock around SHT->queuecommand() Nicholas A. Bellinger
2010-09-17 2:46 ` James Bottomley
2010-09-17 3:02 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2010-09-17 3:20 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2010-09-17 7:20 ` Andi Kleen
2010-09-17 12:13 ` James Bottomley
2010-09-17 14:22 ` Andi Kleen
2010-09-17 14:57 ` James Bottomley
2010-09-17 16:37 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2010-09-17 16:41 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2010-09-17 17:49 ` Tim Chen
2010-09-17 18:21 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2010-09-17 17:24 ` Joe Eykholt
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=20100917032021.GB25217@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=James.Bottomley@suse.de \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andrew.vasquez@qlogic.com \
--cc=fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=james.smart@emulex.com \
--cc=jeykholt@cisco.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michaelc@cs.wisc.edu \
--cc=nab@linux-iscsi.org \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=vasu.dev@linux.intel.com \
--cc=willy@linux.intel.com \
/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).