[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141115010342.GA5933@kroah.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 17:03:42 -0800
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Charles Chiou <ch1102chiou@...il.com>, JBottomley@...allels.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [V2 PATCH 3/4] scsi:stex.c Add reboot support
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 09:27:50AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > +static int stex_reboot_callback(struct notifier_block *self,
> > + unsigned long val,
> > + void *data)
> > +{
> > + if (val == SYS_RESTART)
> > + isRestart = 1;
> > + return NOTIFY_OK;
> > +}
> >
> > @@ -1832,7 +1859,14 @@ static void stex_shutdown(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> > {
> > struct st_hba *hba = pci_get_drvdata(pdev);
> >
> > - stex_hba_stop(hba);
> > + if (hba->yellowstone == 1)
> > + stex_hba_stop(hba, ST_IGNORED);
> > + else {
> > + if (isRestart)
> > + stex_hba_stop(hba, ST_S6);
> > + else
> > + stex_hba_stop(hba, ST_S5);
> > + }
>
> This sort of check for reboot vs restart isn't really something
> we want in drivers. I don't really know how we could find this
> out assuming we even want drivers to behave differently.
>
> Maybe Greg or someone on lkml has an idea how to best handle this case.
What is "this case"?
And yes, I agree, we shouldn't care, in drivers, about reboot vs.
restart, as they should both be the same thing, along with "disconnect",
right?
thanks,
greg k-h
--
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