On 9/8/05, Jim Ramsay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/8/05, Matthew Dharm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 11:14:36AM -0600, Jim Ramsay wrote:
> > > I think I have found a possible bug:
> > > [...]
> > > I suppose the scsi c
e seen the occasion where a single IRQ is used to signal
both a DMA completion AND a hotplug event. Of course in this case the
hotplug event itself would be ignored completely.
So I would recommend getting rid of that check entirely.
--
Jim Ramsay
"Me fail English? That's unpossible!&qu
On 8/24/05, Jim Ramsay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/24/05, Lukasz Kosewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 8/24/05, Stefan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >> Timers appear to operate in an atomic context, so timers should not be
> >
r
That's easy. I'll add it in my 'patch 4/3'
> - bunch of code cleanups
Haven't touched this, looks pretty clean to me
> - proper error handling
This may be something I'll have to stick my fingers in as I do more testing
> - actually making the patches wor
On 8/23/05, Jim Ramsay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Then I must have found an undocumented feature! I've applied this set
> of patches to a 2.6.11 kernel (with few problems) and ran into a bunch
> of "scheduling while atomic" errors when hotplugging a drive, culprit
ueue for hotplug requests to get
them out of the atomic interrupt handler context where they originate?
--
Jim Ramsay
"Me fail English? That's unpossible!"
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTE
6 matches
Mail list logo
