On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:59:06AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2013, Aaron Lu wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 01:46:15PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > On Sat, 19 Jan 2013, Aaron Lu wrote:
> > > > I don't think we should drop such support.
> > > > And the safest way to avoid suc
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 03:56:43PM +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> On Monday 21 January 2013 17:11:04 Aaron Lu wrote:
> > It is not easy for the OS to tell if the drive is being used or not
> > sometimes
> >
> > Alan has reminded me it is possible for an app to open the block device
> > file(/dev/s
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=52911
--- Comment #1 from ja...@warp2biz.com 2013-01-21 23:14:52 ---
Created an attachment (id=91621)
--> (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=91621)
More readable Kernel BUG output
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/user
On 01/21/2013 05:02 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
From: Julia Lawall
Delete successive tests to the same location. The code tested the result
of a previous allocation, that itself was already tested. It is changed to
test the result of the most recent allocation.
A simplified version of the semant
Hi,
I have a Quanta S45 motherboard that I'm trying to install Debian 6.0 on
with a 3Ware 9650-4LPML RAID card.
When the Debian installer inserts the 3w-9xxx module, I get the following
kernel BUG.
I've tried a different 9650 card and booting with acpi=off to no avail so
far. I'm assuming it's a w
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=52911
Summary: 3w-9xxx BUG on insmod with 9650-4LPML and Quanta S45
MB
Product: SCSI Drivers
Version: 2.5
Kernel Version: 2.6.32-5
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Tr
On 01/15/2013 04:21 AM, Aaron Lu wrote:
For ODDs, the upper layer will poll for media change every few
seconds, which will make it enter and leave suspend state very
often. And as each suspend will also cause a hard/soft reset,
the gain of runtime suspend is very little while the ODD may
malfunct
On 13-01-21 02:26 AM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 01/18/2013 05:46 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
On Fri, 2013-01-18 at 11:27 -0500, Ewan D. Milne wrote:
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
@@ -241,6 +241,9 @@ static int scsi_check_sense(struct scsi_cmnd *scmd)
if (!
On Mon, 21 Jan 2013, Aaron Lu wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 01:46:15PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Sat, 19 Jan 2013, Aaron Lu wrote:
> > > I don't think we should drop such support.
> > > And the safest way to avoid such break is we refine the suspend
> > > condition for ODD, and using what
On Monday 21 January 2013 17:11:04 Aaron Lu wrote:
> It is not easy for the OS to tell if the drive is being used or not
> sometimes
>
> Alan has reminded me it is possible for an app to open the block device
> file(/dev/sr0), issue a command(play audio), then close the device file.
> From the OS
On 01/20/2013 02:46 AM, Alan Stern wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jan 2013, Aaron Lu wrote:
Then we indeed have a problem. But I didn't find any such app in
Fedora's repo or by searching the internet.
http://rpm.pbone.net/index.php3/stat/4/idpl/2392183/dir/redhat_5.x/com/cdp-0.33-10.i386.rpm.html
Now tha
On 01/19/2013 05:25 AM, Alan Stern wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013, Aaron Lu wrote:
From: Lin Ming
Uses block layer runtime pm helper functions in
scsi_runtime_suspend/resume.
Remove scsi_autopm_* from sd open/release path and check_events path.
And remove the quiesce call in runtime suspend path,
From: Julia Lawall
Delete successive tests to the same location. The current value of ln has
been tested already, and is clearly not NULL, given the enclosing if
condition. Furthermore, the result of csio_lnode_alloc is currently
ignored.
A simplified version of the semantic match that finds t
From: Julia Lawall
Delete successive tests to the same location. The code tested the result
of a previous allocation, that itself was already tested. It is changed to
test the result of the most recent allocation.
A simplified version of the semantic match that finds this problem is as
follows
Hi all,
here's a topic I'd like to discuss at LSF/MM:
SCSI error handling update to handle I_T Nexus loss.
The current error handler still uses a 'target reset' (or, rather,
bus reset) strategy, although the respective TMF has been obsoleted
since SAM-3. SAM-5 defines an I_T nexus loss event
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 01:46:15PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Jan 2013, Aaron Lu wrote:
> > I don't think we should drop such support.
> > And the safest way to avoid such break is we refine the suspend
> > condition for ODD, and using what ZPODD defined condition isn't that
> > bad to m
On 01/21/2013 05:16 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On 01/15/2013 04:20 AM, Aaron Lu wrote:
>> The ODD can be enabled for ZPODD if the following three conditions are
>> satisfied:
>> 1 The ODD supports device attention;
>> 2 The platform can runtime power off the ODD through ACPI;
>> 3 The ODD is either s
On 01/15/2013 04:20 AM, Aaron Lu wrote:
The ODD can be enabled for ZPODD if the following three conditions are
satisfied:
1 The ODD supports device attention;
2 The platform can runtime power off the ODD through ACPI;
3 The ODD is either slot type or drawer type.
For such ODDs, zpodd_init is call
Hi Julian,
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 07:55:20PM +1100, Julian Calaby wrote:
> Hi Aaron,
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Aaron Lu wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 02:31:50PM +1100, Julian Calaby wrote:
> >> Hi Alan,
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:46 AM, Alan Stern
> >> wrote:
> >> > O
On Mon, 2013-01-21 at 08:26 +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 01/18/2013 05:46 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-01-18 at 11:27 -0500, Ewan D. Milne wrote:
> >> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> >> @@ -241,6 +241,9 @@ static int scsi_check_sense(struc
Hi Aaron,
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Aaron Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 02:31:50PM +1100, Julian Calaby wrote:
>> Hi Alan,
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:46 AM, Alan Stern
>> wrote:
>> > On Sat, 19 Jan 2013, Aaron Lu wrote:
>> >> > closed. Do we want to drop support for that kind
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 02:31:50PM +1100, Julian Calaby wrote:
> Hi Alan,
>
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:46 AM, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Sat, 19 Jan 2013, Aaron Lu wrote:
> >> > closed. Do we want to drop support for that kind of behavior?
> >>
> >> I don't think we should drop such support.
> >>
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 01:46:15PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Jan 2013, Aaron Lu wrote:
>
> > > What happens if you're not running a desktop graphical environment, so
> > > gvfs doesn't mount the disc? Basically, I'm worried that the drive may
> > > remain suspended after sr_open() ret
23 matches
Mail list logo
