From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: Status of storage autosuspend Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 23:20:14 +0100 Message-ID: <20080218222014.GB31201@elf.ucw.cz> References: <20080218202749.GA2656@elf.ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Stern Cc: kernel list , Linux-pm mailing list List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Hi! > > What is the status of USB storage/SCSI autosuspend patches? They work > > nicely here ;-). > > I could submit them, but there is one outstanding problem I would like > to solve first. Maybe you can suggest a solution. > > The problem is how to handle SG_IOCTL calls. It seems that the only > safe thing to do is to force an autoresume and prevent the device from > autosuspending until the device file is closed. Unfortunately the > SG_IOCTL stuff is all handled inside the block layer, and there's no > apparent way (other than some dreadful hack) of passing the necessary > information down to the SCSI layer. Hmm... > Should we ignore this issue and submit the patches anyway? I think you should. "Easy" (and clean) solution to that issue is to just return -EPERM from SG_IOCTL if autosuspend is configured in ;-). Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html