From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 14 May 2002 07:38:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 14 May 2002 07:38:39 -0400 Received: from www.deepbluesolutions.co.uk ([212.18.232.186]:25870 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 14 May 2002 07:38:37 -0400 Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 12:38:30 +0100 From: Russell King To: Martin Dalecki Cc: Neil Conway , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.5.15 IDE 61 Message-ID: <20020514123830.A18118@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <3CE0DDBE.F9EC80AC@ukaea.org.uk> <3CE0D067.6010302@evision-ventures.com> <3CE0E306.6171045B@ukaea.org.uk> <3CE0D952.7080403@evision-ventures.com> <3CE0F08A.5C41CAFA@ukaea.org.uk> <3CE0E538.5040502@evision-ventures.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 12:21:44PM +0200, Martin Dalecki wrote: > Well in the next patch round the hwgroup will be replaced with > a spin lock, which is supposed to be shared between channels which need > forced access serialization between them. Please look > at patches 62a and 63 :-). Something here smells fishy here - you shouldn't hold a spinlock for a long time (a long time === spinlocking, setting up the drive, possibly scheduling, transferring data, getting status, then unlocking). Also, remember, spinlocks are no-ops on uniprocessor systems. -- Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) The developer of ARM Linux http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html