Re: Weird hard disk noise on shutdown (bug #7674)

[Stephen Clark <Stephen.Clark@seclark.us>]

Rob Landley wrote:

>On Tuesday 15 May 2007 5:08 pm, Dave Jones wrote:
>  
>
>>On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 07:32:43PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> > Francesco Pretto wrote:
>> > > 2007/5/4, Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>:
>> > >> Yeap, the third iteration of the patch just got submitted.
>> > >>
>> > >>   http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ide/18485
>> > >>
>> > >> Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be an easy way out.  We'll need
>> > >> userland shutdown(8) update.
>> > >>
>> > >> -- 
>> > >> tejun
>> > >>
>> > > 
>> > > Ok, i can't understand if the patch will be included in 2.6.22 (i
>> > > didn't see it in the Andrew Morton merge plan). However, if you can
>> > > confirm the inclusion, i can send bug reports for ubuntu and gentoo. I
>> > > can even send an email to Miquel van Smoorenburg, who should be the
>> > > mainstream sysvinit developer (and probably the last maintainer).
>> > 
>> > Okay, the patch made upstream and webpage posted.
>> > 
>> >  http://linux-ata.org/shutdown.html
>>
>>There's a typo..
>>
>>"Check whether /sys/modules/libata/parameters/spindown_compat  exists. If it 
>>    
>>
>does, write 0 to it."
>  
>
>>should be /sys/module/libata/parameters/spindown_compat
>>
>>(no 's' after module)
>>    
>>
>
>Um, hang on.  So libata can't reliably turn the system off without data loss 
>and potential damage to hardware unless userspace goes through a special song 
>and dance?  And this is _not_ considered a defect in the kernel?
>
>Why?
>
>(Is there any other piece of hardware that needs userspace to quiesce it just 
>so the _off_switch_ can take effect?  Yes, I read both the gmane thread and 
>the linux-ata.org link.  I used to maintain the busybox halt/reboot/poweroff 
>commands, although I don't anymore.  That just called reboot(), and this 
>worked.)
>
>Why on _earth_ does complicating software suspend add extra requirements to 
>actual shutdown?  Since when does the shutdown command have to enumerate 
>attached block devices?  If anything this would belong in umount -a, but that 
>doesn't care about the hardware of the underlying block devices and 
>SHOULDN'T...
>
>I'm confused.  Could someone please explain?
>
>Rob
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
>  
>
I agree. This didn't happen when I was just using the ide driver, why 
can't libata work as well
as the old ide driver.

My $.02
Steve

-- 

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain temporary safety, 
deserve neither liberty nor safety."  (Ben Franklin)

"The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty 
decreases."  (Thomas Jefferson)