From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161139AbXDEE3S (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Apr 2007 00:29:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161142AbXDEE3S (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Apr 2007 00:29:18 -0400 Received: from jericho.provo.novell.com ([137.65.248.124]:34355 "EHLO jericho.provo.novell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161139AbXDEE3Q (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Apr 2007 00:29:16 -0400 Message-ID: <46147B12.60109@suse.de> Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2007 13:29:06 +0900 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Icedove 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070307) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lee Revell CC: Bill Davidsen , linux@horizon.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, neilb@suse.de, cebbert@redhat.com, jens.axboe@oracle.com, linux-kernel@dale.us, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.20.3 AMD64 oops in CFQ code References: <20070323174630.31051.qmail@science.horizon.com> <4611EADC.3000306@suse.de> <46143338.3020808@tmr.com> <75b66ecd0704042113mebd1275w2fa40bf159416811@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <75b66ecd0704042113mebd1275w2fa40bf159416811@mail.gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Lee Revell wrote: > On 4/4/07, Bill Davidsen wrote: >> I won't say that's voodoo, but if I ever did it I'd wipe down my >> keyboard with holy water afterward. ;-) >> >> Well, I did save the message in my tricks file, but it sounds like a >> last ditch effort after something get very wrong. Which actually is true. ATA ports failing to reset indicate something is very wrong. Either the attached device or the controller is broken and libata shuts down the port to protect the rest of the system from it. The manual scan requests tell libata to give it one more shot and polling hotplug can do that automatically. Anyways, this shouldn't happen unless you have a broken piece of hardware. > Would it reallty be an impediment to development if the kernel > maintainers simply refuse to merge patches that add new sysfs entries > without corresponding documentation? SCSI host scan nodes have been there for a long time. I think it's documented somewhere. -- tejun