> + sess = cmd->se_sess;
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!sess))
> + continue;
> +
> + spin_lock(&sess->sess_cmd_lock);
> spin_lock(&cmd->t_state_lock);
> if (!(cmd->transport_state & CMD_T_ACTIVE)) {
> spin_unlock(&cmd->t_state_lock);
> + spin_unlock(&sess->sess_cmd_lock);
> continue;
> }
> if (cmd->t_state == TRANSPORT_ISTATE_PROCESSING) {
> spin_unlock(&cmd->t_state_lock);
> + spin_unlock(&sess->sess_cmd_lock);
> continue;
> }
> + cmd->transport_state |= CMD_T_ABORTED;
> spin_unlock(&cmd->t_state_lock);
>
> + rc = kref_get_unless_zero(&cmd->cmd_kref);
> + spin_unlock(&sess->sess_cmd_lock);
Similar to the previous patch I don't understand the need for
sess_cmd_lock here.
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&cmd->t_state_lock, flags);
> + if (cmd->transport_state & CMD_T_ABORTED) {
> + tmr->response = TMR_FUNCTION_REJECTED;
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cmd->t_state_lock, flags);
> + goto check_stop;
> + }
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cmd->t_state_lock, flags);
Taking a lock for checking a single bit is pointless.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
