From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 02:03:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 02:03:34 -0400 Received: from fe030.worldonline.dk ([212.54.64.197]:43793 "HELO fe030.worldonline.dk") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 02:03:18 -0400 Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 08:03:29 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Peter Rival Cc: Jonathan Lahr , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: io_request_lock/queue_lock patch Message-ID: <20010906080329.F576@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20010830134930.F23680@us.ibm.com> <20010831075613.A2855@suse.de> <20010831075201.N23680@us.ibm.com> <20010831200333.A9069@suse.de> <20010831113308.A28193@us.ibm.com> <20010903090703.C6875@suse.de> <3B968B82.80405@zk3.dec.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3B968B82.80405@zk3.dec.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 05 2001, Peter Rival wrote: > Jens Axboe wrote: > >You are now browsing the request list without agreeing on what lock is > >being held -- what happens to drivers assuming that io_request_lock > >protects the list? Boom. For 2.4 we simply cannot afford to muck around > >with this, it's jsut too dangerous. For 2.5 I already completely removed > >the io_request_lock (also helps to catch references to it from drivers). > > Is this part of the bio patches? (I confess, I haven't had the time to > look yet.) If not, do you know when we'll be seeing sneak previews of > this code? (Yes, it's me again! ;) Yep it's part of the bio patch. bio-14 for 2.4.10-preX is pending today or tomorrow. -- Jens Axboe