From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata: Integrate ACPI-based PATA/SATA hotplug - version 2 Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 03:57:34 +0100 Message-ID: <20070921025734.GA6434@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20070915030154.GA17655@srcf.ucam.org> <20070915170652.GA25504@srcf.ucam.org> <46F2EE66.9060207@garzik.org> <20070920222138.GA3740@srcf.ucam.org> <46F32DD9.7010509@gmail.com> <20070921024214.GA6317@srcf.ucam.org> <46F3322D.5090407@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([78.32.9.130]:52372 "EHLO vavatch.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753127AbXIUC5n (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Sep 2007 22:57:43 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46F3322D.5090407@gmail.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: Jeff Garzik , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 11:53:33AM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > Maybe just letting both events in is the best idea. It's not like two > duplicate events are gonna break anything and I don't think many vendors > are gonna implement separate mechanism when the default SATA phy based > one works. Works for me. Unrelatedly, is it expected that the EH take some time attempting to revalidate the port before finally deciding that the drive has gone? I seem to lose 15 seconds or so to that, which is more irritating on PATA systems where it tends to block the channel. (Quite why HP put their hotswap optical drives on the same PATA channel as the internal drive is somewhat beyond me, but...) -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org