On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 16:56 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Make concurrent invocations of scsi_device_set_state() safe.

Firstly, I don't understand from this where you think the races are.
Secondly, shouldn't this be the device lock? and thirdly, if we accept
that locking is required, encapsulate it in the function: Having the
callers manage locking is asking for trouble.  The latter may require a
new lock for the state to avoid entanglement.

James





--
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

Reply via email to