From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932678AbYBMXX7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:23:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1764065AbYBMXXS (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:23:18 -0500 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:58450 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761933AbYBMXXR (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:23:17 -0500 Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:22:12 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: minyard@acm.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kbaidarov@ru.mvista.com, openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] IPMI: Don't grab locks in run-to-completion mode Message-Id: <20080213152212.814e1868.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080213162749.GD9830@minyard.local> References: <20080213162749.GD9830@minyard.local> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:27:49 -0600 Corey Minyard wrote: > This patch prevents deadlocks in IPMI panic handler caused by msg_lock > in smi_info structure and waiting_msgs_lock in ipmi_smi structure. Again, what are the newly-added barrier()s for? Was cpu_relax() intended? If a barrier indeed was intended then, as always, each one should have a comment explaining why it is there. Because it is frequently hard to determine what the programmer was trying to do.