From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755110AbZBWLMm (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Feb 2009 06:12:42 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754879AbZBWLMM (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Feb 2009 06:12:12 -0500 Received: from brick.kernel.dk ([93.163.65.50]:28452 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753295AbZBWLML (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Feb 2009 06:12:11 -0500 Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:09:37 +0100 From: Jens Axboe To: "Miller, Mike (OS Dev)" Cc: Andrew Morton , "torvalds@linux-foundation.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "coldwell@redhat.com" Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] block bits for 2.6.29-rc5 Message-ID: <20090223110936.GY29783@kernel.dk> References: <20090218144105.GZ30821@kernel.dk> <20090219170715.47781cc2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090220164055.GZ29783@kernel.dk> <0F5B06BAB751E047AB5C87D1F77A77885CA670E6F8@GVW0547EXC.americas.hpqcorp.net> <20090220165354.GB29783@kernel.dk> <0F5B06BAB751E047AB5C87D1F77A77885CA670E82F@GVW0547EXC.americas.hpqcorp.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0F5B06BAB751E047AB5C87D1F77A77885CA670E82F@GVW0547EXC.americas.hpqcorp.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Feb 20 2009, Miller, Mike (OS Dev) wrote: > Jens wrote: > > > > > Perhaps we should shrink it to something a little more > > tolerable and > > > > put it in the noop loop instead. 30 seconds is insane... > > > > > > Some of these controllers do take a long time to recover from the > > > reset because the firmware has to re-initialize. The firmware guys > > > claim that's only a few seconds but that's not true. > > > > > > Granted, the 5i is old as dirt. Don't know how many are still out > > > there running newer kernels. > > > > So a small improvement would be to do that delay only for 5i. > > Or how about just being a little more relaxed, ala the below? > > It's still 30 seconds in total, but that's now worst case. > > Will the 5i crap itself if we attempt to talk to it too soon? > > > > diff --git a/drivers/block/cciss.c b/drivers/block/cciss.c > > index d2cb67b..b5a0611 100644 > > --- a/drivers/block/cciss.c > > +++ b/drivers/block/cciss.c > > @@ -3611,11 +3611,15 @@ static int __devinit > > cciss_init_one(struct pci_dev *pdev, > > schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(30*HZ); > > > > /* Now try to get the controller to respond to > > a no-op */ > > - for (i=0; i<12; i++) { > > + for (i=0; i<30; i++) { > > if (cciss_noop(pdev) == 0) > > break; > > - else > > - printk("cciss: no-op > > failed%s\n", (i < 11 ? "; re-trying" : "")); > > + > > + schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(HZ); > > + } > > + if (i == 30) { > > + printk(KERN_ERR "cciss: controller > > seems dead\n"); > > + return -EBUSY; > > } > > } > > The controller won't crap the bed, it will just ignore any requests > until it becomes ready. I don't see any problem with this change. OK, then it should be safe enough. I've added the patch to the upstream queue, with your reviewed-by tag. -- Jens Axboe