public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andreas Bombe <aeb@debian.org>
To: Joerg Dorchain <joerg@dorchain.net>
Cc: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] amiflop: get rid of sleep_on calls
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 01:48:10 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081210004810.GA5073@infernal.debian.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081209082608.GA10651@Redstar.dorchain.net>

On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 09:26:08AM +0100, Joerg Dorchain wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 04:59:38PM +0000, Andreas Bombe wrote:
> > The replacement for the unconditional sleep_on() in fd_motor_on() is a
> > complete_all() together with a INIT_COMPLETION() before the mod_timer()
> > call.  It appears to me that fd_motor_on() might be called concurrently
> > and fd_select() does not guarantee mutual exclusivity in the case the
> > same drive gets selected again.
> 
> Selecting the same drive repeatly does not matter. The selected
> drive is the one the next command or transfer applies to.

I think we're not talking about the same problem.  If I were to use
complete() together with wait_for_completion() there would be a problem
if fd_motor_on() can get as far as wait_for_completion() while a
previous completion is yet uncompleted.  This can not happen for
different drives, as the fd_select() would block.  If it could happen
for the same drive, the complete() would allow only one task to
continue.  The complete_all() takes care of that.

If requests are serialized for a drive so that there won't ever be two
running at the same time for certain (thinking about it, it's probable),
I could make it a simple complete().  It's hardly worth the risk,
however.

  reply	other threads:[~2008-12-10  1:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-12-08 16:59 [PATCH] amiflop: get rid of sleep_on calls Andreas Bombe
2008-12-09  8:26 ` Joerg Dorchain
2008-12-10  0:48   ` Andreas Bombe [this message]
2008-12-10  8:16     ` Joerg Dorchain
2008-12-16 20:23   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2008-12-17  8:00     ` Joerg Dorchain
2008-12-09  8:31 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2008-12-09 18:34   ` Andreas Bombe
2008-12-10  1:02   ` [PATCH v2] " Andreas Bombe
2008-12-14 16:21     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2008-12-23 14:22       ` Andreas Bombe
2008-12-31 16:30         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2008-12-13 15:20   ` [PATCH] " Kolbjørn Barmen
2008-12-13 21:30     ` Geert Uytterhoeven

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=20081210004810.GA5073@infernal.debian.net \
    --to=aeb@debian.org \
    --cc=joerg@dorchain.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org \
    /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