On Wednesday 29 April 2009 23:14:02 James Bottomley wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 22:53 +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > On Wednesday 29 April 2009 22:22:51 Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > James Bottomley wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 22:06 +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > > >> Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > >> ---
> > > >> some minor sd.c fixups against linux-next
> > > >>
> > > >> drivers/scsi/sd.c | 4 ++--
> > > >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >>
> > > >> Index: b/drivers/scsi/sd.c
> > > >> ===================================================================
> > > >> --- a/drivers/scsi/sd.c
> > > >> +++ b/drivers/scsi/sd.c
> > > >> @@ -2140,7 +2140,7 @@ static void sd_shutdown(struct device *d
> > > >> return; /* this can happen */
> > > >>
> > > >> if (sdkp->WCE) {
> > > >> - sd_printk(KERN_NOTICE, sdkp, "Synchronizing SCSI cache\n");
> > > >> + sd_printk(KERN_NOTICE, sdkp, "Synchronizing disk cache\n");
> > > >> sd_sync_cache(sdkp);
> > > >> }
> > > >>
> > > >> @@ -2161,7 +2161,7 @@ static int sd_suspend(struct device *dev
> > > >> return 0; /* this can happen */
> > > >>
> > > >> if (sdkp->WCE) {
> > > >> - sd_printk(KERN_NOTICE, sdkp, "Synchronizing SCSI cache\n");
> > > >> + sd_printk(KERN_NOTICE, sdkp, "Synchronizing disk cache\n");
> > > >> ret = sd_sync_cache(sdkp);
> > > >> if (ret)
> > > >> goto done;
> > > >
> > > > So you want it to say
> > > >
> > > > sda: synchronizing disk cache
> > > >
> > > > instead of
> > > >
> > > > sda: synchronizing SCSI cache
> > > >
> > > > I don't really see that buying us anything in terms of clarity. What's
> > > > the actual problem it solves?
> >
> > Inconsistent kernel messages:
> >
> > if (sdkp->WCE) {
> > sd_printk(KERN_NOTICE, sdkp, "Synchronizing SCSI cache\n");
> > sd_sync_cache(sdkp);
> > }
> >
> > if (system_state != SYSTEM_RESTART && sdkp->device->manage_start_stop) {
> > sd_printk(KERN_NOTICE, sdkp, "Stopping disk\n");
> > sd_start_stop_device(sdkp, 0);
> > }
> >
> > > Indeed.
> > >
> > > And we can argue for weeks about English text, too. Non-disk devices
> >
> > Or we can just apply the patch and go back with the program.
> >
> > > like SSDs have caches too, so I'd say "SCSI cache" is more accurate than
> > > "disk cache". But maybe "SCSI writeback cache" would be even better.
> >
> > Could you please explain me what *SCSI* cache is?
>
> It's the cache described by SBC (SCSI Block Commandset).
Sorry, I don't buy it.
There is no "SCSI cache" in the SBC spec (at least not in sbc2r16).
> > Does ATA disks have *SCSI* cache (whatever it is)?
>
> Only if you use it via SAT (SCSI to ATA translation).
Hmm, and without SAT there is ATA cache, right? :)
> > Please also note that sd.c uses "disk" all over the place.
>
> Yes, but I think the four other suggestions for text demonstrate the
> need to get something worm proof back on this can ASAP.
Well, "SCSI device writeback cache" should be fine with everybody, no? ;)
Anyway, please just scrap that patch.
Thanks,
Bart
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
