Re: [PATCH 01/21] uas: replace WARN_ON_ONCE() with lockdep_assert_held()

Greg Kroah-Hartman
2014-09-10T13:52:03Z

On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:15:41PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 09/10/2014 02:54 PM, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 14:00 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On 09/10/2014 01:56 PM, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 13:48 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> Note this series is NOT intended for stable, but I accidentally
> >>>> had "cc = stable@vger.kernel.org" in my .git/config when sending
> >>>> this series, please ignore for stable.
> >>>>
> >>>> NACK for stable.
> >>>
> >>> If this is not for stable, what do you intend to do about
> >>> the problems in stable? For example patch#01 of this series
> >>> looks like clear stable material to me.
> >>
> >> The plan for stable is mostly, as lame as that is, to make sure
> >> we get all the right quirks in place so that error handling
> >> does not get triggered, for now.
> >
> > How? A medium can be defect. Short of entirely disabling it,
> > error handling will be triggered.
>
> I agree that this is a concern, but defective disks are not the
> norm. All the bugs I've received sofar seem to be about incompatibilities
> between the Linux uas/scsi stack and the device, not defective mediums.
>
> >> I agree that once this set has seen wider testing, we should
> >> reconsider, and probably add it, to stable. But at this point
> >> in time I'm worried that it may cause regressions, and as such
> >> it is not stable material atm IHMO.
> >
> > Well, we would exchange something known to work imperfectly
> > for something feared to work imperfectly.
>
> True. Note as said I'm not against this going into stable, I just don't
> want to rush it into stable. So first lets get it reviewed and into
> 3.18 (and see how it works for the users who have been having troubles
> sofar, see my request for testing), and then see from there.
>
> I assume that you agree that this is (way) too late for 3.17?

Yes it is.

And I agree, let's test this out first, and if it solves problems,
_then_ we can backport it to stable as needed.

thanks for the patches, I'll queue them up for 3.18.

greg k-h