On Tue, Aug 06 2002, Petr Vandrovec wrote:
> > After all ide_raw_taskfile only gets used for REQ_SPECIAL request
> > types. This does *not* contain normal data request from block IO.
> > As of master slave issues - well we have the data pre allocated per
> > device not per channel! If q->request_fn would properly return the
> > error count instead of void, we could even get rid ot the
> > checking for rq->errors after finishment... But well that's
> > entierly different story.
>
> For example do_cmd_ioctl() invokes ide_raw_taskfile, without any locking.
> Two programs, both issuing HDIO_DRIVE_CMD at same time, will compete
> over one drive->srequest struct: you'll get same drive->srequest structure
> submitted twice to blk_insert_request (hm, Jens, will this trigger
> BUG, or will this just damage request list?).
Just silently damage request list. We _could_ easily add code to detect
this, but it's not been a problem in the past so not worth looking for.
AFAICS, Petr is completely right wrt this race.
-- Jens Axboe- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 07 2002 - 22:00:30 EST