[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <24a3427e-d0dd-4f77-0342-71f0296135be@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023 10:24:25 +0800
From: Wenchao Hao <haowenchao2@...wei.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
"James E . J . Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
<linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <louhongxiang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] scsi: Add comment of target_destroy in
scsi_host_template
On 2023/10/18 5:04, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 10/15/23 19:08, Wenchao Hao wrote:
>> Add comment to tell callback function target_destroy of
>> scsi_host_template is called in atomic context.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wenchao Hao <haowenchao2@...wei.com>
>> ---
>> include/scsi/scsi_host.h | 3 +++
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/scsi/scsi_host.h b/include/scsi/scsi_host.h
>> index 49f768d0ff37..2e8d77441064 100644
>> --- a/include/scsi/scsi_host.h
>> +++ b/include/scsi/scsi_host.h
>> @@ -245,6 +245,9 @@ struct scsi_host_template {
>> * midlayer calls this point so that the driver may deallocate
>> * and terminate any references to the target.
>> *
>> + * Note: this callback in called with spin_lock shost->host_lock held,
>> + * so donot call functions might cause schedule
>> + *
>> * Status: OPTIONAL
>> */
>> void (* target_destroy)(struct scsi_target *);
>
> The above comment can be made shorter and spelling and grammar can be improved. How about the following: "This callback is called with the host lock held and hence must not sleep."?
>
Looks better, I would update.
Thanks.
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists