Re: [PATCH 06/11] qla4xxx: added srb referance counter

[Mike Christie <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>]

On 02/11/2010 04:57 PM, Mike Christie wrote:
> On 02/11/2010 05:08 AM, Ravi Anand wrote:
>> On Mon, 01 Feb 2010, Mike Christie wrote:
>>>
>>> On 01/30/2010 12:28 AM, Ravi Anand wrote:
>>>>
>>>> - msleep(2000);
>>>> - } while (max_wait_time--);
>>>> + if (got_ref&& (atomic_read(&rp->ref_count) == 1)) {
>>>> + done++;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + msleep(ABORT_POLLING_PERIOD);
>>>
>>>
>>> Did you want to use krefs for the refcounting?
>>
>> We will add it to our to do list and submit a patch later on.
>> For right now we will like to stick to it as kref will require
>> additional testing.
>>
>>> And why is this so funky (got_ref arg and refcount peak) compared to the
>>> qla2xxx one?
>>
>> I don't think qla2xxx is doing any reference counting in eh_abort() path.
>> Basically its trying to differentiate for case where it takes an
>> additional
>> reference when the cmd is with the F/W. In that case if its the last guy,
>> then it can go ahead and complete the command.
>>
>
> got_ref is always 0 isn't it (at least in the patch it is)? It seems
> like you can just get rid of all that and just copy qla2xxx's code.

Hey, since it is always 0, then

if (got_ref && (atomic_read(&rp->ref_count) == 1)) {

will never be true, right? I think you can just drop that chunk or let 
me know if it is used in another patch I missed or something.