lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jun]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] IDE: Fix HDIO_DRIVE_RESET handling
    Date
    Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com> wrote:
    > On Monday 23 June 2008, Elias Oltmanns wrote:
    [...]
    >> Indeed, the following patch series is based on nex-20080620. Just to be
    >> absolutely clear though, this is actually a bug fix since a
    >>
    >> # hdparm -w /dev/hda
    >>
    >> currently freezes the system if there happens to be any I/O operation in
    >> progress. Not sure whether this is serious enough for -rc or, indeed,
    >> -stable trees, but I thought I'd mention it.
    >
    > According to 'man hdparm':
    >
    > -w Perform a device reset (DANGEROUS). Do NOT use this option. It
    > exists for unlikely situations where a reboot might otherwise be
    > required to get a confused drive back into a useable state.
    >
    > so I don't think that a rush is necessary (however we may still want to get
    > patch #1 in for 2.6.26).

    I see.

    >
    > BTW Your fix adds framework which can be re-used for fixing locking of
    >IDE
    > settings (+ it finally makes sense to dust-off my IDE settings rework which
    > was always low-prio and was never posted :) and maybe it could be also used
    > for drive->special handling.

    Alan's remark made me think again and I'm still not quite sure whether I
    can (and indeed should) fix ide_abort() and allow for out of band
    execution of HDIO_DRIVE_RESET as well as idle immediate with head unload
    for disk shock protection. What are your views on Alan's remark and my
    reply?

    [...]
    >> 4. Adds some more error reporting facilities and documents them as well.
    >>
    >> Please be particularly alert when reviewing the last patch. I merely
    >> did what seemed to be the right and obvious thing to do but I ironed out
    >> some irregularities along the way which (for all improbability) may have
    >> been there for some reason or other. It beats me, for instance, why
    >> ->polling but not ->resetting should be reset to 0 when
    >> sil_sata_reset_poll() returns non zero. So, I now both are 0 once any
    >> of the poll functions returns ide_stopped.
    >
    > Looks OK but please move the above description to the patch description.

    Will do.

    >
    > Patches #2 and #3 also look good.

    Thanks for reviewing.

    Regards,

    Elias


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-06-24 09:25    [W:0.024 / U:31.360 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site