[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47D0A58D.3050500@garzik.org>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 21:16:45 -0500
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
CC: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
Mark Lord <liml@....ca>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ata_ram driver
Tejun Heo wrote:
> James Bottomley wrote:
>>> Yeap, sure. It's the combination of things that always made me put this
>>> off. Is there a function I can call to just shutdown the host instead
>>> of destroying it?
>> Not really ... the process of unbinding the ULDs causes their remove
>> methods to call shudown. It is possible to separate this in the ULDS;
>> but the original design was to make remove and shutdown be similar for
>> the very reason that if you're removing the driver with unflushed data
>> in the cache, we'd really like it flushed (flush is called from
>> shutdown) because you have no way to talk to the device after this
>> without reinserting the driver.
>
> The problem is that libata EH and other stuff aren't ready to let go of
> the SCSI host up until the last moment and that last moment can't be
> moved before SCSI host destruction because shutdown sequence (flush and
> spindown) requires live EH. I think this can be solved by shooting down
> individual sdev's instead of destroying the scsi_host.
I'm curious how the picture would change, if we used a scsi_host for
each ata_host.
Jeff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists