On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Lin, > > Hi Gwendal, > >> >> In the patch d9027470b88631d0956ac37cdadfdeb9cdcf2c99, I did limit the >> amount of data cleaning in some of the ata objects. >> >> If setting err_mask to 0 masks the regression I introduced in the >> patch, I may have altered too much how ata_device object is >> reinitialized when a device is found. I am digging deeper, I may have >> change the code to try to preserve the ering as much as possible. >> >> Concerning your patch, isn't adding a test (ent->eflags & >> ATA_EFLAG_OLD_ER) in ata_count_probe_trials_cb() more in line with >> speed_down_verdict_cb() code? > > This could also fix the regression. > > But the fundamental problem is should ata_ering_map still iterate the old > error history which were cleared already? ATA_EFLAG_OLD_ER marks the entry as irrelevant for the current error handler. It can still be interesting to be able to see the history of errors for a particular device without going through dmesg output. Especially if you want a script to do it. Gwendal. > > Lin Ming > >> >> Gwendal. -- 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
