Re: [PATCH] revert async probing of VMBus scsi device

2019-06-05 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 12:26:47 -0700 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 12:10:20PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > Sure. But they should not get a way out for just one specific driver. > > > > There are people running new kernels on 6 year old distributions. > > Was every d

Re: [PATCH] revert async probing of VMBus scsi device

2019-06-05 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 12:26:47 -0700 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 12:10:20PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > Sure. But they should not get a way out for just one specific driver. > > > > There are people running new kernels on 6 year old distributions. > > Was every d

Re: [PATCH] revert async probing of VMBus scsi device

2019-06-05 Thread David Miller
From: Christoph Hellwig Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 12:07:23 -0700 > On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 12:06:40PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: >> > Which is true for every device, and why we use UUIDs or label for >> > mounts that are supposed to be stable. >> >> Not everyone is smart enough to do that. > >

Re: [PATCH] revert async probing of VMBus scsi device

2019-06-05 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 12:10:20PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > Sure. But they should not get a way out for just one specific driver. > > There are people running new kernels on 6 year old distributions. > Was every distribution smart enough then? If you think so, then > this not necessary

Re: [PATCH] revert async probing of VMBus scsi device

2019-06-05 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 12:07:23 -0700 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 12:06:40PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > Which is true for every device, and why we use UUIDs or label for > > > mounts that are supposed to be stable. > > > > Not everyone is smart enough to do that.

Re: [PATCH] revert async probing of VMBus scsi device

2019-06-05 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 12:06:40PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > Which is true for every device, and why we use UUIDs or label for > > mounts that are supposed to be stable. > > Not everyone is smart enough to do that. Sure. But they should not get a way out for just one specific driver.

Re: [PATCH] revert async probing of VMBus scsi device

2019-06-05 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 11:56:37 -0700 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 11:52:05AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > Doing asynchronous probing can lead to reordered device names > > which is leads to failed mounts. > > Which is true for every device, and why we use UUIDs or lab

Re: [PATCH] revert async probing of VMBus scsi device

2019-06-05 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 11:52:05AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > Doing asynchronous probing can lead to reordered device names > which is leads to failed mounts. Which is true for every device, and why we use UUIDs or label for mounts that are supposed to be stable.

RE: [PATCH] revert async probing of VMBus scsi device

2019-06-05 Thread Haiyang Zhang
> -Original Message- > From: linux-hyperv-ow...@vger.kernel.org ow...@vger.kernel.org> On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger > Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2019 2:52 PM > To: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org > Cc: linux-hyp...@vger.kernel.org; Stephen Hemminger > > Subject: [PATCH] revert async probing