Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755798AbXEIJqR (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2007 05:46:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753294AbXEIJqA (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2007 05:46:00 -0400 Received: from canuck.infradead.org ([209.217.80.40]:54681 "EHLO canuck.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754706AbXEIJp7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2007 05:45:59 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 02:46:47 -0700 From: Greg KH To: David Miller Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, bunk@stusta.de, cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Please revert 5adc55da4a7758021bcc374904b0f8b076508a11 (PCI_MULTITHREAD_PROBE) Message-ID: <20070509094647.GB13245@kroah.com> References: <20070508153713.344cc881@gondolin.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <20070508141149.GJ4226@stusta.de> <20070508.141554.112287211.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070508.141554.112287211.davem@davemloft.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-06) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1700 Lines: 40 On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 02:15:54PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Linus Torvalds > Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 08:27:34 -0700 (PDT) > > > Threading at the bus level just inevitably means things like random > > numbers for devices depending on some timing/scheduling issue. That's > > nasty. > > I hadn't considered this issue, so ignore the other reply I made to > this thread. Although as an aside I'm starting to become of an > opinion that device numbering doesn't matter. Every device should > have a unique ID of sorts, or a unique physical location, and that > should factor into the thing users use to refer to the object. We pretty much already do this today. For block devices, as an example, look at /dev/disk/ which udev creates so that you can handle block devices being discovered in any order possible. > Anyways, it would be nice, however, to really deal with the case like > when the IDE layer is waiting for a probe to port X to timeout, > meanwhile we could be initializing the networking card. > > Another bad case is, as you mentioned, SCSI bus resets and SAS/FC > fabric scans. Those take several seconds if not longer and it's > really stupid to not be able to do other things during that time. Yes, because of that, I think this kind of multi-probe stuff should be done in the IDE/SATA/SCSI bus code, not in the PCI code, as PCI "normally" does not have any speed issues. thanks, greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/