From: Nathan Bryant <nbryant@optonline.net>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: SCSI development list <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Suspending SCSI devices and buses
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:30:28 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4125EEE4.50102@optonline.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0408191647170.2106-100000@ida.rowland.org>
Alan Stern wrote:
>Thanks. Looking at your patch, I have a question. It doesn't look like
>the resume path is careful to check for Unit Attention with Power On or
>Medium May Have Changed sense. What happens if somebody changes the
>medium while the drive is suspended? Or am I missing something?
>
You're not missing anything. :(
Thanks for the feedback, looks like you've found a real problem with the
patch: that is, due to the unconditonal spinup call on resume, we clear
any UNIT ATTENTION state before any of the upper layers ever see it, so
nobody will notice a possible media change.
Unfortunately, I think that the current media change detection code in
the Linux kernel can not distinguish power-on events from media change
events. I'm not sure doing so is even possible for SCSI devices.
(Comments on that?) Proposed solutions:
Approach #1:
* Continue to do the unconditional spinup, but only for devices that are
already mounted.
This may miss some media change events, but if we really can't
distinguish power-on from media change, maybe that's somebody else's
problem if the device was already mounted. (Changing mounted media is
the user's fault.)
(Hmm, what about devices that are opened for read/write but not mounted?)
Approach #2:
* Test for UNIT_ATTENTION before spinning up and report this as a media
change.
Safer, but may report "false positive" media change events if the device
was only powered down/up.
Nathan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-08-20 12:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-18 20:36 Suspending SCSI devices and buses Alan Stern
2004-08-18 20:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-08-18 20:49 ` Nathan Bryant
2004-08-19 21:05 ` Alan Stern
2004-08-19 21:20 ` Nathan Bryant
2004-08-20 12:30 ` Nathan Bryant [this message]
2004-08-20 13:35 ` Luben Tuikov
2004-08-20 14:33 ` Nathan Bryant
2004-08-20 15:08 ` Alan Stern
2004-08-20 15:53 ` Nathan Bryant
2004-08-20 16:43 ` Alan Stern
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-08-20 20:49 Pat LaVarre
2004-08-20 21:38 ` Nathan Bryant
2004-08-20 22:06 ` Pat LaVarre
2004-08-20 22:32 ` Nathan Bryant
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4125EEE4.50102@optonline.net \
--to=nbryant@optonline.net \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox