corruption with mtdblock

[Nicolas Pitre]

Oh!  here's the third one!  It was sunk in my inbox... ;)

On Thu, 9 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:

> 
> dwmw2 at infradead.org said:
> >  Upon further consideration, it may be cleaner (at the cost of
> > _slightly_ higher io_request_lock contention) just to _not_ drop the
> > spinlock between finishing one request and checking to see if the
> > queue is empty.
> 
> 'further consideration' is all well and good - but upon consumption of 
> generous quantities of coffee, it occurs to me that this doesn't protect us 
> from eating the first request on the queue if one arrives while the kernel 
> thread is still initialising itself.

Well spotted.

(today i'm definitely destined to agree with you whatever you say...)

> Defining a QUEUE_PLUGGED macro isn't that ugly, is it?

No it isn't.


Nicolas



To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe mtd" to majordomo at infradead.org