From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Cox Subject: Re: PATCH: straighten out the IDE layer locking and add hotplug Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:33:26 -0400 Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20040817153326.GA31746@devserv.devel.redhat.com> References: <20040815151346.GA13761@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <200408171630.07979.bzolnier@elka.pw.edu.pl> <20040817144604.GA30778@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <200408171705.43974.bzolnier@elka.pw.edu.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:25264 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268301AbUHQPe1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:34:27 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200408171705.43974.bzolnier@elka.pw.edu.pl> List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Cc: Alan Cox , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 05:05:43PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > You can't unload them in 2.4. > Really? That would simplify a lot of considerations... I wanted to make that work but it proved too interesting in handing the drive back to legacy > > We can do it the 2.4-ac way - that works with the locking I think. What > if you are talking about abusing HDIO_SCAN_HWIF then HELL NO No I'm talking about the 2.4-ac way - using the bus state stuff which is currently useless. > > might be nicer if it works out is to follow the shutdown/suspend code > > approach so that we actually queue the "unplug" into the command stream. > > and we are back to lack of sysfs integration Not really. We don't need sysfs to queue a series of command phases and then drop the drive. Alan