From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jesse Barnes Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 17:50:03 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] I/O-check interface for driver's error handling Message-Id: <200503040950.03866.jbarnes@engr.sgi.com> List-Id: References: <422428EC.3090905@jp.fujitsu.com> <200503010910.29460.jbarnes@engr.sgi.com> <20050304135429.GC3485@openzaurus.ucw.cz> In-Reply-To: <20050304135429.GC3485@openzaurus.ucw.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Pavel Machek Cc: linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, Matthew Wilcox , Linus Torvalds , Jeff Garzik , Hidetoshi Seto , Linux Kernel list , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Linas Vepstas , "Luck, Tony" On Friday, March 4, 2005 5:54 am, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > > If there's no ->error method, at leat call ->remove so one device only > > > takes itself down. > > > > > > Does this make sense? > > > > This was my thought too last time we had this discussion. A completely > > asynchronous call is probably needed in addition to Hidetoshi's proposed > > API, since as you point out, the driver may not be running when an error > > occurs (e.g. in the case of a DMA error or more general bus problem). > > The async > > Hmm, before we go async way (nasty locking, no?) could driver simply > ask "did something bad happen while I was sleeping?" at begining of each > function? This is what Seto is proposing, aiui. I.e. calls around I/O so you can gracefully handle errors during that I/O. > For DMA problems, driver probably has its own, timer-based, > "something is wrong" timer, anyway, no? The idea is to allow them to do something like that, or consolidate such threads in a platform specific error handling thread or interrupt handler that can call a driver's ->dma_error(dev) routine (or ->error(dev, ERROR_DMA) or whatever) routine. Jesse