From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756968Ab0IBUYp (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Sep 2010 16:24:45 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com ([209.85.161.46]:36355 "EHLO mail-fx0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756952Ab0IBUYn (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Sep 2010 16:24:43 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=m+I9UEmGqDTfBE6MAsGbUlSI3Gn7hTW8ew+Htn3E/72ZJRG1Dof/dVBsx1tPPk2N5N rHOYiFs0m7D4YapN+rBCt4dxuMVNJB1DSkUmY7huuvOewmEmG2LhzB31Mv2LM7Cop+11 lZ7+li2ZslN1nRyaFIBDiBKmEJucYeakauj9I= Message-ID: <4C800829.9040802@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 22:25:13 +0200 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" CC: Stephan Diestelhorst , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-ide@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-pm@lists.osdl.org" , Stephan Diestelhorst Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata: skip EH autopsy and recovery during suspend References: <201007091750.05020.stephan.diestelhorst@amd.com> <4C7F6931.4050707@gmail.com> <4C7F7649.3010409@gmail.com> <201009022216.45303.rjw@sisk.pl> In-Reply-To: <201009022216.45303.rjw@sisk.pl> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, On 09/02/2010 10:16 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Putting the issue at hand aside, I'm not really sure if using SCSI EH for > suspending the controller is a good idea. It seems overly complicated and > it doesn't match the new PCI suspend model with separate ->suspend(), > ->freeze() and ->poweroff() callbacks. Moreover, the passing of pm_message_t > back and forth doesn't make things clear either. > > Would it be possible to rework this thing entirely at one point? Well, I think I would need more than that to rework the whole thing. There are a lot of benefits in sharing the same path between probing / error handling and suspend/resuming. ATA has a lot of quirks which have to be dealt with and it will be very fragile to scatter handling logics over multiple separate paths. We definitely can try to make the plumbing from power management easier to follow. Thanks. -- tejun