On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 16:56 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
Make concurrent invocations of scsi_device_set_state() safe.
Firstly, I don't understand from this where you think the races are.
Secondly, shouldn't this be the device lock? and thirdly, if we accept
that locking is required,
On 07/01/13 16:49, James Bottomley wrote:
On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 16:56 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
Make concurrent invocations of scsi_device_set_state() safe.
Firstly, I don't understand from this where you think the races are.
Secondly, shouldn't this be the device lock? and thirdly, if we
On Mon, 2013-07-01 at 17:17 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 07/01/13 16:49, James Bottomley wrote:
On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 16:56 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
Make concurrent invocations of scsi_device_set_state() safe.
Firstly, I don't understand from this where you think the races are.
Make concurrent invocations of scsi_device_set_state() safe.
Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche bvanass...@acm.org
Acked-by: Hannes Reinecke h...@suse.de
Cc: James Bottomley jbottom...@parallels.com
Cc: Tejun Heo t...@kernel.org
Cc: Mike Christie micha...@cs.wisc.edu
---
drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c |
4 matches
Mail list logo