Re: ncr53c9x fallout from asserting kernel lock in scsipi_base

[Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost>]

On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 04:44:54PM +0100, Martin Husemann wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 04:39:08PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > if ncr53c9x is not MP-safe, it should be running under the KERNEL_LOCK
> > itself, and so should not need to take it before calling back in
> > scsipi.
> 
> Where is that dealt with? I.e. where is the lock taken before the attach
> function is called?

This I don't know. Maybe it's not taken when running autoconf.
If that's true I'm surprised there isn't more issues than this ...

-- 
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost>
     NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--