From: Neil Conway <nconway.list@ukaea.org.uk>
To: Martin Dalecki <dalecki@evision-ventures.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.5.15 IDE 61
Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 12:10:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3CE0F08A.5C41CAFA@ukaea.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3CE0DDBE.F9EC80AC@ukaea.org.uk> <3CE0D067.6010302@evision-ventures.com> <3CE0E306.6171045B@ukaea.org.uk> <3CE0D952.7080403@evision-ventures.com>
Martin Dalecki wrote:
> There is no problem to go in paralell on different channels for
> requests. The serialization has only to be done
> for the drive setup.
I agree for general chipsets, but my whole point was with regard to
buggy chipsets which need to be serialized on both channels.
If you're saying that even these broken chipsets are OK with having
transfers on one channel while setting up transfers on another channel,
then perhaps you are right but that's not what I believed to be the case
(can't find info to tell me either way right now).
But if that really were the case, then how could the (e.g.) cmd640
problem ever have been manifested? A spinlock is ALWAYS held while
ide_do_request is executing. Even if it weren't, only an SMP machine
could be trying to program both channels simultaneously because
interrupts are disabled too.
Neil
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-05-14 11:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-05-14 9:49 [PATCH] 2.5.15 IDE 61 Neil Conway
2002-05-14 8:52 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-05-14 10:12 ` Neil Conway
2002-05-14 9:30 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-05-14 11:10 ` Neil Conway [this message]
2002-05-14 10:21 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-05-14 11:38 ` Russell King
2002-05-14 10:49 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-05-14 12:10 ` Alan Cox
2002-05-14 11:11 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-05-14 12:47 ` Alan Cox
2002-05-14 12:30 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-05-15 14:43 ` Pavel Machek
2002-05-14 12:00 ` Russell King
2002-05-14 11:03 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-05-14 13:03 ` Neil Conway
2002-05-14 13:27 ` Andre Hedrick
2002-05-14 14:45 ` Alan Cox
2002-05-14 14:30 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-05-14 16:20 ` Neil Conway
2002-05-14 16:32 ` Jens Axboe
2002-05-14 16:47 ` Neil Conway
2002-05-14 16:51 ` Jens Axboe
2002-05-15 11:37 ` Neil Conway
2002-05-14 22:51 ` Mike Fedyk
2002-05-14 16:26 ` Jens Axboe
2002-05-14 19:34 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2002-05-15 6:16 ` Jens Axboe
2002-05-15 8:32 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2002-05-15 9:42 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-05-15 9:32 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-05-15 11:44 ` Neil Conway
2002-05-15 11:02 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-05-15 13:10 ` Alan Cox
2002-05-15 13:34 ` Neil Conway
2002-05-15 13:04 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-05-15 14:08 ` benh
2002-05-15 16:40 ` Denis Vlasenko
2002-05-15 11:55 ` Neil Conway
2002-05-17 7:07 ` Mike Fedyk
2002-05-17 11:06 ` Neil Conway
2002-05-17 10:12 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-05-14 16:03 ` Neil Conway
2002-05-14 16:46 ` Alan Cox
2002-05-14 12:52 ` Daniela Engert
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-05-06 3:53 Linux-2.5.14 Linus Torvalds
2002-05-13 9:48 ` [PATCH] 2.5.15 IDE 61 Martin Dalecki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3CE0F08A.5C41CAFA@ukaea.org.uk \
--to=nconway.list@ukaea.org.uk \
--cc=dalecki@evision-ventures.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).