Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 10:27:17 -0700 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Thomas Quinot <thomas@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: xpt_done() and Giant? Message-ID: <45E70CF5.10500@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <20070228230339.GA77452@melamine.cuivre.fr.eu.org> References: <20070225193802.GA32605@melamine.cuivre.fr.eu.org> <45E5F730.5070900@samsco.org> <20070228230339.GA77452@melamine.cuivre.fr.eu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thomas Quinot wrote: > * Scott Long, 2007-02-28 : > >> I overlooked this, sorry. Can you survive with it as it is for now? > > Well, the current situation has been current for quite some time, so I > think I can survive it :-) > > On the other hand, the ATAPI/CAM interrupt routine runs outside of Giant > and calls xpt_done (and also calls CAM_DEBUGGED itself), and it would be > nice if CAMDEBUG worked with it. Is there any compelling reason for > having GIANT_REQUIRED in xpt_path_comp? The only case I can see this as > useful is when called in the context of CAM_DEBUG or CAM_DEBUGGED, to > protect against a concurrent update of cam_dpath, but this really looks > to me like a really tiny corner case. > > Thomas. > Full locking will be going into CAM soon, making this moot. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45E70CF5.10500>