[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <18564.4308.219240.133199@notabene.brown>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:30:12 +1000
From: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu,
Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>,
Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>,
Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl>
Subject: Re: [patch 3/4] fastboot: make the raid autodetect code wait for
all devices to init
On Sunday July 20, arjan@...radead.org wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 09:06:36 +1000
> Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de> wrote:
>
> > if (driver_probe_done() != 0) {
> > printk("md: Waiting for all devices to be available before
> > autodetect\n" "md: If you don't boot off raid, use
> > raid=noautodetect\n"); do
>
>
> how about this patch?
Well,
> - while (driver_probe_done() != 0)
> + printk(KERN_INFO "md: Waiting for all devices to be available before autodetect\n");
> + printk(KERN_INFO "md: If you don't use raid, use raid=noautodetect\n");
that's better thanks. I'm quite happy with that.
> + while (driver_probe_done())
> msleep(100);
That's worse. Now it really looks like a boolean that is being used
wrongly. It seems that driver_probe_done either returns 0 or -EBUSY,
so I'd prefer
> + while (driver_probe_done() < 0)
> msleep(100);
or even
> + while (driver_probe_done() == -EBUSY)
> msleep(100);
though that is less robust.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
--
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