linux-kernel - Re: USB storage no-boot regression (bisected)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090415125813.34c9a151@infradead.org>
Date:	Wed, 15 Apr 2009 12:58:13 -0700
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>
Cc:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	Linux USB kernel mailing list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: Re: USB storage no-boot regression (bisected)

On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:37:44 -0400
Mark Lord <lkml@....ca> wrote:

> Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:25:05 -0400
> > Mark Lord <lkml@....ca> wrote:
> > 
> >> Greg KH wrote:
> >>> ..
> >>> The issue is that you were just lucky that your machine worked
> >>> properly previously.  My boxes with the same type of setup didn't,
> >>> so I quickly realized what the root delay boot option was for.
> >>> You need to just do the same thing here, there's nothing else we
> >>> can do.
> >> ..
> >>
> >> Bad excuse.
> >>
> >> SATA drives also take variable amounts of time to "show up" at
> >> boot. Perhaps Jeff should customize libata for your and Arjan's
> >> exact setups, just to help with understanding the point here.  :)
> > 
> > the difference is that with sata you know when you are done and
> > have all possible drives. No so much much with USB. So with SATA we
> > can, and do, wait for the scan to complete at the right point in
> > the boot.
> > 
> >> The speed ups are fine (and welcome), but we really now need
> >> Arjan to follow-up with a patch to have the kernel *by default*
> >> wait a little longer for the rootfs to show up.
> >>
> >> Not forever, just a few seconds to compensate for the regression.
> > 
> > seconds!!!!!
> > The whole kernel boots in half a second!
> ..
> 
> Oh, absolutely I agree.
> 
> That's why I'm not suggesting a DELAY
> but rather a TIMEOUT (where it keeps trying up until the timeout).

This exists today. It's just not something Jeff chose to use ;)
(because he didn't need to)

> 
> For desktop, it should really just wait forever,
> but I can understand situations (server room)
> where that would be a Really Bad Idea.

it's called rootwait and such :)


-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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/