From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 28 May 2001 07:29:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 28 May 2001 07:29:31 -0400 Received: from t111.niisi.ras.ru ([193.232.173.111]:29703 "EHLO t111.niisi.ras.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 28 May 2001 07:29:13 -0400 Message-ID: <3B12A5DE.7020408@niisi.msk.ru> Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 15:24:14 -0400 From: Alexandr Andreev Organization: niisi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux 2.4.3 i686; en-US; rv:0.9) Gecko/20010507 X-Accept-Language: ru, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jens Axboe CC: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Disabling interrupts before block device request call In-Reply-To: <3B0EE8CF.7040502@niisi.msk.ru> <20010526000119.A23273@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jens Axboe wrote > >Even with dropping io_request_lock, it's not recommended to sleep inside >the request_fn. WIth plugging, you are basically preventing the other >plugged queues from being run until you return. > >You could use a timer or similar to call you on a specified timeout >instead. > Does it mean, that if i need timer interrupts in my block device driver, i need to do sti() instead of unlock io_request_lock? Is there any common rule for device drivers in such case?