Re: Status of storage autosuspend

2008-02-19 Thread Greg KH
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 10:19:11PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > Should we ignore this issue and submit the patches anyway? > > > > I think you should. "Easy" (and clean) solution to that issue is to > > just return -EPERM from SG_IOCTL if autosuspend

Re: Status of storage autosuspend

2008-02-18 Thread Alan Stern
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Should we ignore this issue and submit the patches anyway? > > I think you should. "Easy" (and clean) solution to that issue is to > just return -EPERM from SG_IOCTL if autosuspend is configured in ;-). :-) Okay, I'll update the patches to 2.6.25-rc2

Re: Status of storage autosuspend

2008-02-18 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > > What is the status of USB storage/SCSI autosuspend patches? They work > > nicely here ;-). > > I could submit them, but there is one outstanding problem I would like > to solve first. Maybe you can suggest a solution. > > The problem is how to handle SG_IOCTL calls. It seems that the o

Re: Status of storage autosuspend

2008-02-18 Thread Alan Stern
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > What is the status of USB storage/SCSI autosuspend patches? They work > nicely here ;-). I could submit them, but there is one outstanding problem I would like to solve first. Maybe you can suggest a solution. The problem is how to handle SG_I

Status of storage autosuspend

2008-02-18 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! What is the status of USB storage/SCSI autosuspend patches? They work nicely here ;-). Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html