Re: [PATCH] libata queue updated

[Tejun <htejun@gmail.com>]

Hello, Ingo.

Ingo Oeser wrote:
> Hi Tejun,
>
> On Tuesday 31 January 2006 01:04, Tejun wrote:
>
> > Ingo Oeser wrote:
> >
> > > What about putting the information directly into "ap->device[INDEX].class" 
> > > in the sole caller (ata_drive_probe_reset) so far?
> >
> > Not altering ->class directly in lldd driver is one major point of this 
> > whole patchset such that higher level driving logic has a say on whether 
> > a device is online or not, not the low level driver.  Primarily this is 
> > useful for sharing low-level codes with hot plugging / EH but it's also 
> > possible to retry some of the operations during probing in limited cases.
>
>
> Ok, with this argument, I finally get it. Now I know why you do it this
> way. You let the lld driver suggest a class for it's devices and verify
> these suggestions by high level code. 
>
> The only way to get to this classification data is by resetting the ATA
> device.
>
> It might be technically possible to set ->class directly and 
> fix it up in high level logic, as needed.

Yeap, that's right.  I actually considered that too but it was kind of 
messy that way - storing the current value, invoke callbacks, restoring 
values if something doesn't look right.  Just using temporary variable 
is much more straight-forward, it seemed.

> Your explicit design decision was NOT to do this but to put this
> suggestions from low level driver into a temporary on stack structure
> from the higher level API.
>
> And since the maintainer is happy already, I couldn't care less.
>
> Thanks for your patience :-)

Great that we could reach an agreement.

Thanks. :-)

--
tejun
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/