Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:12:43 -0700 | From | Matthew Dharm <> | Subject | Re: USB serial regression 2.6.31.1 -> 2.6.31.2 [PATCH] |
| |
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:58:40AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Mon, 12 Oct 2009, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > > Alan, what do you think ? I definitely don't like Ben E's most recent > > patch with a quirk for all devices, it's simply a lot more code for > > something that will come back and bite again when somebody does the > > same mistake again. I'd rather have the request sense code be more > > robust. But this patch is fine, as was my previous one. > > I agree that it seems silly to have a flag _for_ SANE_SENSE and another > flag _against_ SANE_SENSE. Retrying seems easier and more robust.
Dualing flags, where one is auto-set and the other quirked, is almost guaranteed to get us into a maintance nightmare.
> > So it boils down on clearing SANE_SENSE vs. not clearing it. If we > > clear it, we probably want to keep it cleared (via an INSANE_SENSE > > flag ?). But on the other hand, I don't think that always going > > for a retry when a SANE_SENSE fails is going to hurt and sounds > > like the robust thing to do, so I don't mind that simple patch > > from Ben. So up to you :-) > > I agree; it won't hurt much and only if the device is buggy to begin > with.
I agree; the extra retry is more robust, more straightforward, and more maintainable long-term.
Matt
-- Matthew Dharm Home: mdharm-usb@one-eyed-alien.net Maintainer, Linux USB Mass Storage Driver
My mother not mind to die for stoppink Windows NT! She is rememberink Stalin! -- Pitr User Friendly, 9/6/1998 [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |