Re: libata/ipr/powerpc: regression between 2.6.39-rc4 and 2.6.39-rc5

[Brian King]

On 06/16/2011 02:51 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 04:34:17PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
>>> That looks like the right thing to do. For ipr's usage of
>>> libata, we don't have the concept of a port frozen state, so this flag
>>> should really never get set. The alternate way to fix this would be to
>>> only set ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN in ata_port_alloc if ap->ops->error_handler
>>> is not NULL.
>>
>> It seemed like ipr is as you say, but I wasn't sure if it was
>> appropriate to make the change above in the common libata-scis code or
>> not. I don't want to break some other device on accident.
>>
>> Also, I tried your suggestion, but I don't think that can happen in
>> ata_port_alloc? ata_port_alloc is allocated ap itself, and it seems like
>> ap->ops typically gets set only after ata_port_alloc returns?
> 
> Maybe we can test error_handler in ata_sas_port_start()?

Good point. Since libsas is converted to the new eh now, we would need to have
this test.

Thanks,

Brian

-- 
Brian King
Linux on Power Virtualization
IBM Linux Technology Center


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/