On Mon, 13 May 2013 20:08:44 -0700, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > On Mon, 2013-05-13 at 18:00 -0400, Jörn Engel wrote: > > > > I agree that the overhead doesn't matter. The msleep(100) spells this > > out rather explicitly. What does matter is that a) the patch retains > > old behaviour with much simpler code and b) it fixes a race that kills > > the machine. I can live without a, but very much want to keep b. ;) > > Fucking around with ->sess_cmd_lock during each loop of ->sess_cmd_list > in target_wait_for_sess_cmds is not simpler code..
I could argue that fucking around with ->sess_cmd_lock during each loop is simpler than the communication through cmd_wait_set and cmd_wait_comp. But simplicity is ultimately subjective and we can argue all day. drivers/infiniband/ulp/srpt/ib_srpt.c | 2 +- drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/tcm_qla2xxx.c | 2 +- drivers/target/target_core_transport.c | 64 +++++++++----------------------- include/target/target_core_base.h | 2 - include/target/target_core_fabric.h | 2 +- 5 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) But diffstat is reasonably objective. Do you really want me to come up with an alternative patch that adds code instead of removing it? Jörn -- Simplicity is prerequisite for reliability. -- Edsger W. Dijkstra -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
