From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] libata: various fixes related to EH, take #4 Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 21:16:45 +0900 Message-ID: <43EC842D.2070601@gmail.com> References: <11395518482722-git-send-email-htejun@gmail.com> <43EC8077.4080003@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from pproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.166.183]:35132 "EHLO pproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751158AbWBJMQt (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Feb 2006 07:16:49 -0500 Received: by pproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id o67so234740pye for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 04:16:48 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <43EC8077.4080003@pobox.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Garzik Cc: albertcc@tw.ibm.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Jeff Garzik wrote: > Tejun Heo wrote: > >> Hello, Jeff. >> >> This patchset is the fourth take of 'various fixes related to EH' >> patchset. From the previous take[1], %01 and %02 made into the tree >> and %03 got nacked and #04 acked but didn't make into the tree due to >> dependency to %03. (% denotes patch numbers in the previous take, # >> in this take) > > > Applied all four patches to 'upstream', but with comments: > > * Given your current implementation, ata_qc_complete() should be inline, > defined in a header somewhere. And __ata_qc_complete() should be > un-inlined. Will submit a patch ASAP. > * Is ATA_FLAG_IN_EH needed in future patches? It's not used ATM. I don't know it depends on how we'll do EH <-> irq/pio synchronization, but my bet is on ATA_FLAG_IN_EH being used. Thanks. -- tejun