From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [git-patch] hotplug fix patches added Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 22:50:31 +0900 Message-ID: <448C1FA7.6030305@gmail.com> References: <448B7FFD.9050507@gmail.com> <448C1C1E.7080109@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com ([64.233.162.198]:45114 "EHLO nz-out-0102.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751299AbWFKNug (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jun 2006 09:50:36 -0400 Received: by nz-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id r28so1116838nza for ; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 06:50:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <448C1C1E.7080109@pobox.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Garzik Cc: "linux-ide@vger.kernel.org" Jeff Garzik wrote: > Tejun Heo wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Two hotplug fix patches have been added to libata-tj #for-jeff. >> >> * libata: add missing finish_wait() call in ata_port_wait_eh() >> * libata: cosmetic change in struct ata_port >> >> The following two patches have been dropped as it hasn't been acked yet. >> >> * ata_piix: fix ghost device probing by honoring PCS present bits[1] > > Seems vaguely OK to me... > > >> * libata: add ata_port->private_flags[2] > > What's the justification for this? Running out of room in flags? Yeap, ran out of bits while implementing power management. > If we are going to do this, I would move any such flags to the > LLDD-allocated hpriv structure completely. I wouldn't add hpriv_flags > to struct ata_port. Several drivers only need flags. IMHO, having to allocate hpriv just for flags is a bit annoying. I also thought about separating capability flags and dynamic flags but couldn't think of proper field name. ap->dyn_flags? Also, it would be easy to screw up and test the wrong field. Another sucky option was using u64 for flags. BTW, both patches are available in branch #for-jeff-pending. -- tejun