[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1258893136.3627.10.camel@localhost>
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 12:32:16 +0000
From: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To: Wouter van Heyst <larstiq@...stiq.dyndns.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
504391@...s.debian.org, Pierre Ossman <pierre@...man.eu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: add module parameter to set whether cards are
assumed removable
On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 12:42 +0100, Wouter van Heyst wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 10:31:49PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
[...]
> > In general, it is not possible to tell whether a card present in an MMC
> > slot after resume is the same that was there before suspend. So there
> > are two possible behaviours, each of which will cause data loss in some
> > cases:
> >
> > CONFIG_MMC_UNSAFE_RESUME=n (default): Cards are assumed to be removed
> > during suspend. Any filesystem on them must be unmounted before
> > suspend; otherwise, buffered writes will be lost.
> >
> > CONFIG_MMC_UNSAFE_RESUME=y: Cards are assumed to remain present during
> > suspend. They must not be swapped during suspend; otherwise, buffered
> > writes will be flushed to the wrong card.
> >
> > Currently the choice is made at compile time and this allows that to be
> > overridden at module load time.
>
> I'm running 2.6.32-rc7 with this patch applied and CONFIG_MMC_UNSAFE_RESUME=y
> That works as desired for my non-removable case. Is it desired that I
> test if 'removable=1' will thrash my filesystem?
Please test with CONFIG_MMC_UNSAFE_RESUME=n (which Debian will continue
to use) and removable=0.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Unix is many things to many people,
but it's never been everything to anybody.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (829 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists