From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vladislav Bolkhovitin Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] sd: implement START/STOP management Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 18:14:44 +0300 Message-ID: <46029D64.6040206@vlnb.net> References: <20070320150718.GF6152@htj.dyndns.org> <20070320151359.GG6152@htj.dyndns.org> <460020DF.6090203@torque.net> <460099DD.2050706@gmail.com> <460258BD.9080606@vlnb.net> <20070322122940.GA29824@khazad-dum.debian.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-relay-01.mailcluster.net ([85.249.135.242]:53689 "EHLO mail-relay-01.mailcluster.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933142AbXCVPPG (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Mar 2007 11:15:06 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070322122940.GA29824@khazad-dum.debian.net> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh Cc: Tejun Heo , dougg@torque.net, Jeff Garzik , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, James Bottomley , djwong@us.ibm.com Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Vladislav Bolkhovitin wrote: > >>Seems, there is another way of doing a bank spin up / spin down: doing >>it in two passes. On the first pass START_STOP will be issued with >>IMMED=1 on all devices, then on the second pass START_STOP will be >>issued with IMMED=0. So the devices will spin up / spin down in the >>parallel, but synchronously, hence the needed result will be achieved > > > And maybe trip the PSU's overcurrent defenses? There is a reason to default > to sequential spin-up for disks... But on spin down there is no such problem > Of course, it can be user-selectable. But should it be the default? >