From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755557Ab1CBHr1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2011 02:47:27 -0500 Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com ([209.85.161.46]:60697 "EHLO mail-fx0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752175Ab1CBHr0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2011 02:47:26 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=AVXoLC5ALs/X2mO5R05bCj1uZmyoaegB/SnZCxvRfa/HJt7o6UnetyywBxK8tbOlL7 wdlcMGF+YRGjGpV6Hkc+wrsYh2gz2W4kiLoT+6zMTe1mx3r7Z52osFdsPqqpDncwgB7+ Q7oxXZgH5TV8L7FdgvUmEiDbmWtasKT1VT5dU= Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 08:47:21 +0100 From: Tejun Heo To: Jeff Garzik Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, LKML , stable Subject: Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] libata: fix hotplug for drivers which don't implement LPM Message-ID: <20110302074721.GF19669@htj.dyndns.org> References: <20110224183037.GS7840@htj.dyndns.org> <4D6DF58D.5030905@pobox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4D6DF58D.5030905@pobox.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 02:45:17AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > On 02/24/2011 01:30 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > >ata_eh_analyze_serror() suppresses hotplug notifications if LPM is > >being used because LPM generates spurious hotplug events. It compared > >whether link->lpm_policy was different from ATA_LPM_MAX_POWER to > >determine whether LPM is enabled; however, this is incorrect as for > >drivers which don't implement LPM, lpm_policy is always > >ATA_LPM_UNKNOWN. This disabled hotplug detection for all drivers > >which don't implement LPM. > > > >Fix it by comparing whether lpm_policy is greater than > >ATA_LPM_MAX_POWER. > > > >Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo > >Cc: stable@kernel.org > > applied, though putting this into 2.6.38.1 is preferred to changing > this at -rc7... stable@ cc'd. Understood. As long as it ends up in stable@, either way is okay with me. Thank you. -- tejun