On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 12:04 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > James Bottomley wrote: > > On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 15:02 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >> James Bottomley wrote: > >>> Could we please get this in ... I thought I mentioned several times that > >>> it fixes a fatal oops in both aic94xx and ipr. > >> Tejun has a persistent objection... see other email. > > > > Actually, see other email .. I meant that this patch (eliminate dma > > padding) is independent of the drain one. > > Sorry about the delay. > > There's a problem here. For the blk layer dma padding itself, it's okay > but the problem is that it blocks the pending draining patch without > supplying usable alternative at the moment. The alternative is already there. The current drain infrastructure is already in the block layer. The patch I sent merely activates it for ATA. Is there some issue with this that I haven't forseen? My analysis is that it should do everything your patch does (except at the block layer and in a manner that doesn't trigger the aic94xx panic). > I agree that the long term > solution should be in the block layer && I understand that it causes > problem for SAS controllers but for the moment if we don't include the > existing draining patch, far more ATAPI devices are affected. So, it's > catch-22 situation. > > I think the best solution is to update block layer draining such that it > can be included together before the merge window closes. I'll dig into it. Like I said, the block layer pieces are already upstream. All we need is the ATA bits and I think it should all work ... unless there's some part I haven't though of? James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
