From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:34:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:34:32 -0400 Received: from ztxmail03.ztx.compaq.com ([161.114.1.207]:46090 "EHLO ztxmail03.ztx.compaq.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:34:18 -0400 Message-ID: <3B968B82.80405@zk3.dec.com> Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 16:30:58 -0400 From: Peter Rival Organization: Tru64 QMG Performance Engineering User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.3) Gecko/20010801 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jens Axboe Cc: Jonathan Lahr , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: io_request_lock/queue_lock patch 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> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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! ;) - Pete