On Sun, 27 Feb 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>[..] and so it's also the only
>one who currently needs lowlevel controller locking [..]
Thinko: sys_sable and sys_rawhide after the per-desc-lock thing will need
a lowlevel controller lock too (as sys_dp264) that I have not implemented
in my patch yet. That's an incremental work. Adding a spinlock around the
I/O controller accesses in such two files will make them SMP safe too.
I'll do that tomorrow...
Andrea
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 29 2000 - 21:00:16 EST