lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 05:20:21 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de> Cc: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>, linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Vasu Dev <vasu.dev@...ux.intel.com>, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>, Mike Christie <michaelc@...wisc.edu>, James Smart <james.smart@...lex.com>, Andrew Vasquez <andrew.vasquez@...gic.com>, FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>, Joe Eykholt <jeykholt@...co.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] scsi: Drop struct Scsi_Host->host_lock around SHT->queuecommand() 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. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists