Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755148Ab1FOUCp (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jun 2011 16:02:45 -0400 Received: from e6.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.146]:58012 "EHLO e6.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752839Ab1FOUCi (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jun 2011 16:02:38 -0400 Message-ID: <4DF90FCA.1040706@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 15:02:18 -0500 From: Brian King User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 SUSE/3.1.10 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nishanth Aravamudan CC: jgarzik@pobox.com, mbizon@freebox.fr, tj@kernel.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, wayneb@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: libata/ipr/powerpc: regression between 2.6.39-rc4 and 2.6.39-rc5 References: <20110615191747.GA6324@us.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20110615191747.GA6324@us.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1827 Lines: 52 On 06/15/2011 02:17 PM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > From what I can tell, the only place that explicitly clears the FROZEN > flag is the error-handling code via ata_eh_thaw_port(). > > So I thought either we're not invoking the error-handler at probe time > correctly to kick the port or perhaps the SAS code is not clearing the > flag? > > I tried the following patch: > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c > index d51f979..abd0e0b 100644 > --- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c > +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c > @@ -3797,6 +3797,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_alloc); > */ > int ata_sas_port_start(struct ata_port *ap) > { > + ap->pflags &= ~ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN; > return 0; > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_start); > > and the CD-ROM drive works, but I have no idea if it's the right thing > to do. I chose this particular change, FWIW, because we call > ata_sas_port_start before we probe in ata_sas_port_init and it seems > like we need to mark the port as not frozen before we init it? Perhaps > that should really be a call to a thaw function, not sure. Let's just > say the ATA/SAS/SCSI interactions are a bit hard to follow at first :) 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. 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@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/