From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: 2.6.17-rc5-git1: regression: resume from suspend(RAM) fails: libata issue Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 15:06:27 -0400 Message-ID: <4478A333.20500@garzik.org> References: <1148634262.2310.7.camel@forrest26.sh.intel.com> <4477CEF5.9000908@garzik.org> <200605271423.40037.liml@rtr.ca> <4478A1F5.6030406@garzik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:18830 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964929AbWE0TGe (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 May 2006 15:06:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4478A1F5.6030406@garzik.org> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Mark Lord , Jens Axboe , "zhao, forrest" , Tejun Heo , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Jeff Garzik wrote: > Linus Torvalds wrote: >> What's the layering violation in just having ATA resume make sure it's >> not ATA_BUSY? > >> Why are you guys fighting over this? > > As soon as we start powering on the SATA phy (code exists, 2.6.18), or > dealing with port multipliers (code exists, 2.6.19), the "working patch" > stops working. so basically when the SCSI and libata suspend is used for any controller other than ata_piix, really :) Jeff