On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 08:51:04AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> This reimplementation uses a global wait queue and a bit per device.
> I've open-coded prepare_to_wait() / finish_wait() as I could optimise
> it significantly by knowing that the pci_lock protected us at all points.
I forgot to report how I've tested it. Using the 'test' patch from
yesterday, I have two processes running lspci in an infinite loop. When
I write a 1 to /sys/bus/pci/devices/0000\:00\:01.0/block, they both
halt. When I write a 0, they both resume.
Then I tried doing echo 0 >/sys/bus/pci/devices/0000\:00\:01.0/block a
second time, and I got the WARNing I expected.
animal:~# echo 1 >/sys/bus/pci/devices/0000\:00\:01.0/block
animal:~# echo 1 >/sys/bus/pci/devices/0000\:00\:01.0/block
animal:~# echo 0 >/sys/bus/pci/devices/0000\:00\:01.0/block
They both resumed (as expected; we don't support nesting).
animal:~# echo 1 >/sys/bus/pci/devices/0000\:00\:01.0/block
animal:~# echo 1 >/sys/bus/pci/devices/0000\:00\:01.1/block
animal:~# echo 0 >/sys/bus/pci/devices/0000\:00\:01.0/block
animal:~# echo 0 >/sys/bus/pci/devices/0000\:00\:01.1/block
Both resumed only after the second echo 0 (as lspci reads all devices
before printing anything).
It's not exactly rigorous testing, but I couldn't think of any other
cases to try.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
