| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 09:50:20 +0800
From: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>
To: Liu Jiang <liuj97@...il.com>
CC: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Liu Jiang <liu97@...il.com>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Liu Jiang <jiang.liu@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata: remove dead code from libata-acpi.c
On 06/15/2013 11:02 AM, Liu Jiang wrote:
> From: Liu Jiang <liu97@...il.com>
>
> Commit 30dcf76acc69 "libata: migrate ACPI code over to new bindings"
> removed ACPI dock notification related code, but there's some dead
> code left, so clean up it.
I never noticed this, but it looks to be the case...
I'm not sure the dock notification code is removed intentionally or
mistakenly though, if it is a mistake, then instead of removing the left
code here, we probably should add the dock notification code back.
But I have no test system or any knowledge about how ata dock works, so
I may be wrong :-)
Thanks,
Aaron
>
> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> Cc: Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>
> Cc: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>
> Cc: linux-ide@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Liu Jiang <jiang.liu@...wei.com>
> ---
> drivers/ata/libata-acpi.c | 123 ----------------------------------------------
> 1 file changed, 123 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-acpi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-acpi.c
> index 87f2f39..e50c987 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/libata-acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-acpi.c
> @@ -91,129 +91,6 @@ acpi_handle ata_dev_acpi_handle(struct ata_device *dev)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(ata_dev_acpi_handle);
>
> -/* @ap and @dev are the same as ata_acpi_handle_hotplug() */
> -static void ata_acpi_detach_device(struct ata_port *ap, struct ata_device *dev)
> -{
> - if (dev)
> - dev->flags |= ATA_DFLAG_DETACH;
> - else {
> - struct ata_link *tlink;
> - struct ata_device *tdev;
> -
> - ata_for_each_link(tlink, ap, EDGE)
> - ata_for_each_dev(tdev, tlink, ALL)
> - tdev->flags |= ATA_DFLAG_DETACH;
> - }
> -
> - ata_port_schedule_eh(ap);
> -}
> -
> -/**
> - * ata_acpi_handle_hotplug - ACPI event handler backend
> - * @ap: ATA port ACPI event occurred
> - * @dev: ATA device ACPI event occurred (can be NULL)
> - * @event: ACPI event which occurred
> - *
> - * All ACPI bay / device realted events end up in this function. If
> - * the event is port-wide @dev is NULL. If the event is specific to a
> - * device, @dev points to it.
> - *
> - * Hotplug (as opposed to unplug) notification is always handled as
> - * port-wide while unplug only kills the target device on device-wide
> - * event.
> - *
> - * LOCKING:
> - * ACPI notify handler context. May sleep.
> - */
> -static void ata_acpi_handle_hotplug(struct ata_port *ap, struct ata_device *dev,
> - u32 event)
> -{
> - struct ata_eh_info *ehi = &ap->link.eh_info;
> - int wait = 0;
> - unsigned long flags;
> -
> - spin_lock_irqsave(ap->lock, flags);
> - /*
> - * When dock driver calls into the routine, it will always use
> - * ACPI_NOTIFY_BUS_CHECK/ACPI_NOTIFY_DEVICE_CHECK for add and
> - * ACPI_NOTIFY_EJECT_REQUEST for remove
> - */
> - switch (event) {
> - case ACPI_NOTIFY_BUS_CHECK:
> - case ACPI_NOTIFY_DEVICE_CHECK:
> - ata_ehi_push_desc(ehi, "ACPI event");
> -
> - ata_ehi_hotplugged(ehi);
> - ata_port_freeze(ap);
> - break;
> - case ACPI_NOTIFY_EJECT_REQUEST:
> - ata_ehi_push_desc(ehi, "ACPI event");
> -
> - ata_acpi_detach_device(ap, dev);
> - wait = 1;
> - break;
> - }
> -
> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(ap->lock, flags);
> -
> - if (wait)
> - ata_port_wait_eh(ap);
> -}
> -
> -static void ata_acpi_dev_notify_dock(acpi_handle handle, u32 event, void *data)
> -{
> - struct ata_device *dev = data;
> -
> - ata_acpi_handle_hotplug(dev->link->ap, dev, event);
> -}
> -
> -static void ata_acpi_ap_notify_dock(acpi_handle handle, u32 event, void *data)
> -{
> - struct ata_port *ap = data;
> -
> - ata_acpi_handle_hotplug(ap, NULL, event);
> -}
> -
> -static void ata_acpi_uevent(struct ata_port *ap, struct ata_device *dev,
> - u32 event)
> -{
> - struct kobject *kobj = NULL;
> - char event_string[20];
> - char *envp[] = { event_string, NULL };
> -
> - if (dev) {
> - if (dev->sdev)
> - kobj = &dev->sdev->sdev_gendev.kobj;
> - } else
> - kobj = &ap->dev->kobj;
> -
> - if (kobj) {
> - snprintf(event_string, 20, "BAY_EVENT=%d", event);
> - kobject_uevent_env(kobj, KOBJ_CHANGE, envp);
> - }
> -}
> -
> -static void ata_acpi_ap_uevent(acpi_handle handle, u32 event, void *data)
> -{
> - ata_acpi_uevent(data, NULL, event);
> -}
> -
> -static void ata_acpi_dev_uevent(acpi_handle handle, u32 event, void *data)
> -{
> - struct ata_device *dev = data;
> - ata_acpi_uevent(dev->link->ap, dev, event);
> -}
> -
> -static const struct acpi_dock_ops ata_acpi_dev_dock_ops = {
> - .handler = ata_acpi_dev_notify_dock,
> - .uevent = ata_acpi_dev_uevent,
> -};
> -
> -static const struct acpi_dock_ops ata_acpi_ap_dock_ops = {
> - .handler = ata_acpi_ap_notify_dock,
> - .uevent = ata_acpi_ap_uevent,
> -};
> -
> /**
> * ata_acpi_dissociate - dissociate ATA host from ACPI objects
> * @host: target ATA host
>
--
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