Re: klists and struct device semaphores
From: Dmitry Torokhov (dmitry.torokhov_at_gmail.com)
Date: 03/29/05
- Previous message: Christoph Hellwig: "Re: [PATCH 2.6.11] aoe [7/12]: support configuration of AOE_PARTITIONS from Kconfig"
- In reply to: Alan Stern: "Re: klists and struct device semaphores"
- Next in thread: Patrick Mochel: "Re: klists and struct device semaphores"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:26:17 -0500 To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:18:13 -0500 (EST), Alan Stern
<stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
>
> With that change in place we can guarantee that every time a USB driver's
> probe() is called, both the interface and the parent device are locked.
>
> I don't know how cleanly this can be implemented. You probably don't want
> to lock dev->parent->sem every time, only when needed. Maybe the simplest
> approach would be to add a flag in struct bus_type, which could be set for
> the USB bus_type and clear for everything else.
>
I think it is fine to lock parent unconditionally. After all
device/driver matching is not the most performance-critical part of
the kernel.
-- Dmitry - 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/
- Previous message: Christoph Hellwig: "Re: [PATCH 2.6.11] aoe [7/12]: support configuration of AOE_PARTITIONS from Kconfig"
- In reply to: Alan Stern: "Re: klists and struct device semaphores"
- Next in thread: Patrick Mochel: "Re: klists and struct device semaphores"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
