public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pierre Ossman <drzeus@drzeus.cx>
To: Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@atmel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MMC: Flush mmc workqueue late in the boot sequence
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 15:45:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <46432212.9070008@drzeus.cx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070510143737.54969394@dhcp-252-105.norway.atmel.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1103 bytes --]

Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> 
> What exactly makes this unreliable? This is done almost exactly the
> same way for SCSI. See drivers/scsi/scsi_wait_scan.c.
> 

I am not against the function of waiting for an initial scan, what I oppose is
using side effects to achieve that function. I do not want to take
responsibility for something that easily breaks because we use a kernel
subsystem for something it wasn't meant for.

That said, if there is a precedent for achieving this function a certain way, I
might be convinced to let it in. I'll have a look at that scsi example.

> 
> I don't know about USB, but root=/dev/mmcblk0p1 used to work before
> 2.6.20 and it doesn't work anymore. Doesn't that make this a regression?
> 

Yes and no. It depends on if it was an official function, or just an effect of
how things currently were implemented. As far as I can see, it's the latter. The
MMC layer goes through several steps that could very well get delayed or happen
in parallel. So the fact that it happened to work the way you wanted it to was
sheer luck.

Rgds
Pierre



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 251 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2007-05-10 13:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-05-10 10:35 [PATCH] MMC: Flush mmc workqueue late in the boot sequence Haavard Skinnemoen
2007-05-10 12:04 ` Pierre Ossman
2007-05-10 12:37   ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2007-05-10 13:45     ` Pierre Ossman [this message]
2007-05-10 14:33       ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2007-05-10 15:58         ` Pierre Ossman
2007-05-10 16:27           ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2007-05-10 17:51             ` Matt Reimer
2007-05-11  7:44               ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2007-05-10 19:41             ` Pierre Ossman
2007-05-11  8:39               ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2007-05-13 13:34                 ` Pierre Ossman
2007-05-13 13:47                   ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2007-05-13 14:24                     ` Pierre Ossman
2007-05-13 14:37                       ` Haavard Skinnemoen

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=46432212.9070008@drzeus.cx \
    --to=drzeus@drzeus.cx \
    --cc=hskinnemoen@atmel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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