 Home |
Products |
Support |
Community |
News |
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] Broken (and unnecessary) SMP locking in blktap.c
| To: | "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [Xen-devel] Broken (and unnecessary) SMP locking in blktap.c |
| From: | "Andrew Warfield" <andrew.warfield@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 27 Sep 2006 14:02:12 -0700 |
| Cc: | "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Delivery-date: | Wed, 27 Sep 2006 14:02:45 -0700 |
| Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=CiidxSKG4Qq7LVlkbNS2/2oH9TJ4MMgUqGwMpI676AZ+sUuOIqWj0vzhF6N4mSyDZae3UUDJs5F8PTwPv63mqC8Itp39PZfcpj6A3vmPq2KV2B9JFCDBn+cQn/9j9rrOqyXJBb75BD3r395Psi+qKcV8IAHBR4OlDn9bA33yvqQ= |
| Envelope-to: | www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <1159364478.6276.16.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| List-help: | <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
| List-id: | Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
| List-post: | <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
| List-subscribe: | <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
| List-unsubscribe: | <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
| References: | <1159364478.6276.16.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
The *only* reason it might be needed is to provide locking for some hypothetical future use of req_increase() and req_decrease(), which would need to be locked against each other. Given that this isn't done right now, I suggest we nuke both the locking and the (unused) req_decrease function; that can easily be resurrected with correct locking if we want it in the future. Anyone mind if that function dies? Not at all -- req_decrease is generally broken, and removing it and the locking seem like a very good plan. thanks. a. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [Xen-devel] TLB flushing in blktap kernel driver?, Andrew Warfield |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH resend] allow connecting to xenconsole from remote hosts, Muli Ben-Yehuda |
| Previous by Thread: | [Xen-devel] Broken (and unnecessary) SMP locking in blktap.c, Stephen C. Tweedie |
| Next by Thread: | [Xen-devel] [Patch] blktap modular build fix, Stephen C. Tweedie |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
