Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754877Ab0LOTF1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Dec 2010 14:05:27 -0500 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:58006 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753511Ab0LOTF0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Dec 2010 14:05:26 -0500 Message-ID: <4D09116C.6010508@kernel.org> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 20:05:16 +0100 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101209 Fedora/3.1.7-0.35.b3pre.fc14 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: James Bottomley CC: Linux SCSI List , FUJITA Tomonori , lkml Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] scsi: don't use execute_in_process_context() References: <4CBD95C0.6060302@kernel.org> <4CBD95DC.8000001@kernel.org> <1292194113.2989.9.camel@mulgrave.site> <4D073E9A.3000608@kernel.org> <1292335754.3058.2.camel@mulgrave.site> <4D077CD9.6050907@kernel.org> <1292336798.3058.5.camel@mulgrave.site> <4D078052.3040800@kernel.org> <1292382245.19511.56.camel@mulgrave.site> <4D08E2FF.5090605@kernel.org> <1292428486.4688.180.camel@mulgrave.site> <4D08E624.3020808@kernel.org> <1292433773.4688.278.camel@mulgrave.site> In-Reply-To: <1292433773.4688.278.camel@mulgrave.site> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.3 (hera.kernel.org [127.0.0.1]); Wed, 15 Dec 2010 19:05:19 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1016 Lines: 25 Hey, James. On 12/15/2010 06:22 PM, James Bottomley wrote: > Hmm, I suppose the original coding didn't contemplate pre-emption. This > should fix it then, I think (with no alteration to the callsites because > of the encapsulating API). It does assume the function being executed > is local to the file doing the execution, which is true in all current > cases. Yes, it would do, but we were already too far with the existing implementation and I don't agree we need more when replacing it with usual workqueue usage would remove the issue. So, when we actually need them, let's consider that or any other way to do it, please. A core API with only a few users which can be easily replaced isn't really worth keeping around. Wouldn't you agree? Thanks. -- tejun -- 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/