Re: ncr53c9x fallout from asserting kernel lock in scsipi_base

[Izumi Tsutsui <tsutsui%ceres.dti.ne.jp@localhost>]

matt@ wrote:

> On Mar 9, 2012, at 7:53 AM, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> 
> > 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 ...
> 
> Since attach is usually called when the system is cold, there are no
> other CPUs running so the system is effectively in KERNEL_LOCK().
> 
> Rather than fix the driver, maybe init_main should take out KERNEL_LOCK()
> until it exits cold state.  

What about hot-plug?  (we have esp at pcmcia)

---
Izumi Tsutsui