LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
       [not found]   ` <7kDFF-8rd-29@gated-at.bofh.it>
@ 2006-11-27 18:31     ` Elias Oltmanns
  2006-11-30 17:19       ` Pavel Machek
  2006-11-30 18:43       ` Jens Axboe
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Elias Oltmanns @ 2006-11-27 18:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jens Axboe; +Cc: Pavel Machek, Christoph Schmid, linux-kernel

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2208 bytes --]

Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21 2006, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> Hi!
>> 
[...]
>> > After some googeling and digging in gamne i read that someone said that
>> > there are plans for some generic support for HD-parking in the kernel
>> > and thus making such patches obsolete.
[...]
>> I'm afraid we need your help with development here. Porting old patch
>> to 2.6.19-rc6 should be easy, and then you can start 'how do I
>> makethis generic' debate.
>
> 2.6.19 will finally have the generic block layer commands, so this can
> be implemented properly.

Eventually, I've ported the patch to 2.6.19-rc6 (attached). However,
I'll need some gentle guidance by you developers for the next steps,
I'm afraid. What exactly do you mean by "making this generic".
Perhaps, you could give me a hint as to which generic block layer
commands you have in mind that should be used in such a patch.


Here is a short description of what the patch does in its current
shape:

1. Adds functions to ide-disk.c and scsi_lib.c that issue an idle
   immediate with head unload or a standby immediate command as
   appropriate and stop the queue on command completion.
2. Adds matching queue unfreeze functions that also reenable hd power
   management (see source code).
3. Adds an option to the ide-disk and libata module respectively which
   allows to indicate whether idle immediate is supported by the
   drive. Unfortunately, the implemented auto detection feature often
   gives false negatives.
4. Adds a sysfs attribute chich can be used to trigger the disk park
   command and the associated queue freeze.
5. Adds an unfreeze timer that calls the unfreeze function on expiry.

Regards,

Elias

---
 block/ll_rw_blk.c         |  154 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 drivers/ata/libata-core.c |    4
 drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c |   38 ++++++++
 drivers/ata/libata.h      |    1
 drivers/ide/ide-disk.c    |  155 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 drivers/ide/ide-io.c      |   14 +++
 drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c   |  163 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 include/linux/ata.h       |    1
 include/linux/blkdev.h    |   13 ++
 include/linux/ide.h       |    1
 10 files changed, 544 insertions(+)

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: hdaps_protect-2.6.19-rc6-1.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 22695 bytes --]

diff --git a/block/ll_rw_blk.c b/block/ll_rw_blk.c
index 9eaee66..50e4517 100644
--- a/block/ll_rw_blk.c
+++ b/block/ll_rw_blk.c
@@ -36,10 +36,14 @@ #include <scsi/scsi_cmnd.h>
 
 static void blk_unplug_work(void *data);
 static void blk_unplug_timeout(unsigned long data);
+static void blk_unfreeze_work(void *data);
+static void blk_unfreeze_timeout(unsigned long data);
 static void drive_stat_acct(struct request *rq, int nr_sectors, int new_io);
 static void init_request_from_bio(struct request *req, struct bio *bio);
 static int __make_request(request_queue_t *q, struct bio *bio);
 static struct io_context *current_io_context(gfp_t gfp_flags, int node);
+static int blk_protect_register(request_queue_t *q);
+static void blk_protect_unregister(request_queue_t *q);
 
 /*
  * For the allocated request tables
@@ -232,6 +236,13 @@ void blk_queue_make_request(request_queu
 	q->unplug_timer.function = blk_unplug_timeout;
 	q->unplug_timer.data = (unsigned long)q;
 
+	q->max_unfreeze = 30;
+
+	INIT_WORK(&q->unfreeze_work, blk_unfreeze_work, q);
+
+	q->unfreeze_timer.function = blk_unfreeze_timeout;
+	q->unfreeze_timer.data = (unsigned long)q;
+
 	/*
 	 * by default assume old behaviour and bounce for any highmem page
 	 */
@@ -324,6 +335,18 @@ void blk_queue_issue_flush_fn(request_qu
 
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_queue_issue_flush_fn);
 
+void blk_queue_issue_protect_fn(request_queue_t *q, issue_protect_fn *ipf)
+{
+       q->issue_protect_fn = ipf;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_queue_issue_protect_fn);
+
+void blk_queue_issue_unprotect_fn(request_queue_t *q, issue_unprotect_fn *iuf)
+{
+       q->issue_unprotect_fn = iuf;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_queue_issue_unprotect_fn);
+
 /*
  * Cache flushing for ordered writes handling
  */
@@ -1842,6 +1865,7 @@ request_queue_t *blk_alloc_queue_node(gf
 
 	memset(q, 0, sizeof(*q));
 	init_timer(&q->unplug_timer);
+	init_timer(&q->unfreeze_timer);
 
 	snprintf(q->kobj.name, KOBJ_NAME_LEN, "%s", "queue");
 	q->kobj.ktype = &queue_ktype;
@@ -3917,6 +3941,7 @@ int blk_register_queue(struct gendisk *d
 		return ret;
 	}
 
+	blk_protect_register(q);
 	return 0;
 }
 
@@ -3925,6 +3950,7 @@ void blk_unregister_queue(struct gendisk
 	request_queue_t *q = disk->queue;
 
 	if (q && q->request_fn) {
+		blk_protect_unregister(q);
 		elv_unregister_queue(q);
 
 		kobject_uevent(&q->kobj, KOBJ_REMOVE);
@@ -3932,3 +3958,131 @@ void blk_unregister_queue(struct gendisk
 		kobject_put(&disk->kobj);
 	}
 }
+
+/*
+ * Issue lower level unprotect function if no timers are pending.
+ */
+static void blk_unfreeze_work(void *data)
+{
+       request_queue_t *q = (request_queue_t *) data;
+       int pending;
+       unsigned long flags;
+
+       spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags);
+       pending = timer_pending(&q->unfreeze_timer);
+       spin_unlock_irqrestore(q->queue_lock, flags);
+       if (!pending)
+	       q->issue_unprotect_fn(q);
+}
+
+/*
+ * Called when the queue freeze timeout expires...
+ */
+static void blk_unfreeze_timeout(unsigned long data)
+{
+       request_queue_t *q = (request_queue_t *) data;
+
+       kblockd_schedule_work(&q->unfreeze_work);
+}
+
+/*
+ * The lower level driver parks and freezes the queue, and this block layer
+ *  function sets up the freeze timeout timer on return. If the queue is
+ *  already frozen then this is called to extend the timer...
+ */
+void blk_freeze_queue(request_queue_t *q, int seconds)
+{
+	/* Don't accept arbitrarily long freezes */
+	if (seconds >= q->max_unfreeze)
+		seconds = q->max_unfreeze;
+	/* set/reset the timer */
+	mod_timer(&q->unfreeze_timer, msecs_to_jiffies(seconds*1000) + jiffies);
+}
+
+/*
+ * When reading the 'protect' attribute, we return seconds remaining
+ * before unfreeze timeout expires
+ */
+static ssize_t queue_protect_show(struct request_queue *q, char *page)
+{
+	unsigned int seconds = 0;
+
+	spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+	if (blk_queue_stopped(q) && timer_pending(&q->unfreeze_timer))
+	   	/*
+		 * Adding 1 in order to guarantee nonzero value until timer
+		 * has actually expired.
+		 */
+		seconds = jiffies_to_msecs(q->unfreeze_timer.expires
+					   - jiffies) / 1000 + 1;
+	spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+       return queue_var_show(seconds, (page));
+}
+
+/*
+ * When writing the 'protect' attribute, input is the number of seconds
+ * to freeze the queue for. We call a lower level helper function to
+ * park the heads and freeze/block the queue, then we make a block layer
+ * call to setup the thaw timeout. If input is 0, then we thaw the queue.
+ */
+static ssize_t queue_protect_store(struct request_queue *q, const char *page, size_t count)
+{
+	unsigned long freeze = 0;
+
+	queue_var_store(&freeze, page, count);
+
+	if(freeze>0) {
+		/* Park and freeze */
+		if (!blk_queue_stopped(q))
+		       q->issue_protect_fn(q);
+		/* set / reset the thaw timer */
+		spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+		blk_freeze_queue(q, freeze);
+		spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+	} else {
+		spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+		freeze = del_timer(&q->unfreeze_timer);
+		spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+		if (freeze)
+			q->issue_unprotect_fn(q);
+	}
+
+	return count;
+}
+
+static struct queue_sysfs_entry queue_protect_entry = {
+       .attr = {.name = "protect", .mode = S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR },
+       .show = queue_protect_show,
+       .store = queue_protect_store,
+};
+
+static int blk_protect_register(request_queue_t *q)
+{
+	int error = 0;
+
+	/* check that the lower level driver has a protect handler */
+	if (!q->issue_protect_fn)
+		return 1;
+
+	/* create the attribute */
+	error = sysfs_create_file(&q->kobj, &queue_protect_entry.attr);
+	if(error){
+		printk(KERN_ERR
+		       "blk_protect_register(): failed to create protect queue attribute!\n");
+		return error;
+	}
+
+	kobject_get(&q->kobj);
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static void blk_protect_unregister(request_queue_t *q)
+{
+	/* check that the lower level driver has a protect handler */
+	if (!q->issue_protect_fn)
+		return;
+
+	/* remove the attribute */
+	sysfs_remove_file(&q->kobj,&queue_protect_entry.attr);
+	kobject_put(&q->kobj);
+}
diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
index 915a55a..df71abc 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
@@ -74,6 +74,10 @@ static struct workqueue_struct *ata_wq;
 
 struct workqueue_struct *ata_aux_wq;
 
+int libata_protect_method = 0;
+module_param_named(protect_method, libata_protect_method, int, 0444);
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(protect_method, "hdaps disk protection method (0=autodetect, 1=unload, 2=standby)");
+
 int atapi_enabled = 1;
 module_param(atapi_enabled, int, 0444);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(atapi_enabled, "Enable discovery of ATAPI devices (0=off, 1=on)");
diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
index 5c1fc46..8a72e12 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
@@ -841,6 +841,42 @@ static void ata_scsi_dev_config(struct s
 	}
 }
 
+extern int scsi_protect_queue(request_queue_t *q, int unload);
+extern int scsi_unprotect_queue(request_queue_t *q);
+
+static int ata_scsi_issue_protect_fn(request_queue_t *q)
+{
+	struct scsi_device *sdev = q->queuedata;
+	struct ata_port *ap = (struct ata_port *) &sdev->host->hostdata[0];
+	struct ata_device *dev = &ap->device[sdev->id];
+	int unload;
+
+	if (libata_protect_method == 1) {
+		unload = 1;	
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ata_scsi_issue_protect_fn(): unload method requested, overriding drive capability check..\n");
+	}
+	else if (libata_protect_method == 2) {
+		unload = 0;	
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ata_scsi_issue_protect_fn(): standby method requested, overriding drive capability check..\n");
+	}
+	else if (ata_id_has_unload(dev->id)) {
+		unload = 1;
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ata_scsi_issue_protect_fn(): unload support reported by drive..\n");
+	}
+	else {
+		unload = 0;
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ata_scsi_issue_protect_fn(): unload support NOT reported by drive!..\n");
+	}
+
+	/* call scsi_protect_queue, requesting either unload or standby */
+	return scsi_protect_queue(q, unload);
+}
+
+static int ata_scsi_issue_unprotect_fn(request_queue_t *q)
+{
+	return scsi_unprotect_queue(q);
+}
+
 /**
  *	ata_scsi_slave_config - Set SCSI device attributes
  *	@sdev: SCSI device to examine
@@ -864,6 +900,8 @@ int ata_scsi_slave_config(struct scsi_de
 
 	if (dev)
 		ata_scsi_dev_config(sdev, dev);
+	blk_queue_issue_protect_fn(sdev->request_queue, ata_scsi_issue_protect_fn);	
+	blk_queue_issue_unprotect_fn(sdev->request_queue, ata_scsi_issue_unprotect_fn);	
 
 	return 0;	/* scsi layer doesn't check return value, sigh */
 }
diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata.h b/drivers/ata/libata.h
index 0ed263b..da5b103 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/libata.h
+++ b/drivers/ata/libata.h
@@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ struct ata_scsi_args {
 
 /* libata-core.c */
 extern struct workqueue_struct *ata_aux_wq;
+extern int libata_protect_method;
 extern int atapi_enabled;
 extern int atapi_dmadir;
 extern int libata_fua;
diff --git a/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c b/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c
index 0a05a37..b3ff75a 100644
--- a/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c
+++ b/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c
@@ -72,6 +72,10 @@ #include <asm/uaccess.h>
 #include <asm/io.h>
 #include <asm/div64.h>
 
+int idedisk_protect_method = 0;
+module_param_named(protect_method, idedisk_protect_method, int, 0444);
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(protect_method, "hdaps disk protection method (0=autodetect, 1=unload, 2=standby)");
+
 struct ide_disk_obj {
 	ide_drive_t	*drive;
 	ide_driver_t	*driver;
@@ -731,6 +735,154 @@ static int idedisk_issue_flush(request_q
 }
 
 /*
+ * todo:
+ *  - we freeze the queue regardless of success and rely on the 
+ *    ide_protect_queue function to thaw immediately if the command
+ *    failed (to be consistent with the libata handler)... should 
+ *    we also inspect here?
+ */
+void ide_end_protect_rq(struct request *rq, int error)
+{
+	struct completion *waiting = rq->end_io_data;
+
+	rq->end_io_data = NULL;
+	/* spin lock already accquired */
+	if (!blk_queue_stopped(rq->q))
+		blk_stop_queue(rq->q);
+
+	complete(waiting);
+}
+
+int ide_unprotect_queue(request_queue_t *q)
+{
+	struct request rq;
+	unsigned long flags;
+	int pending = 0, rc = 0;
+	ide_drive_t *drive = q->queuedata;
+	u8 args[7], *argbuf = args;
+
+	if (!blk_queue_stopped(q))
+		return -EIO;
+
+	/* Are there any pending jobs on the queue? */
+	pending = ((q->rq.count[READ] > 0) || (q->rq.count[WRITE] > 0)) ? 1 : 0;
+	
+	spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags);
+	blk_start_queue(q);
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(q->queue_lock, flags);
+
+	/* The unload feature of the IDLE_IMMEDIATE command
+	   temporarily disables HD power management from spinning down
+	   the disk. Any other command will reenable HD pm, so, if
+	   there are no pending jobs on the queue, another
+	   CHECK_POWER_MODE1 command without the unload feature should do
+	   just fine. */
+	if (!pending) {
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ide_unprotect_queue(): No pending I/O, re-enabling power management..\n");
+		memset(args, 0, sizeof(args));
+		argbuf[0] = 0xe5; /* CHECK_POWER_MODE1 */
+		ide_init_drive_cmd(&rq);
+		rq.cmd_type = REQ_TYPE_ATA_TASK;
+		rq.buffer = argbuf;
+		rc = ide_do_drive_cmd(drive, &rq, ide_head_wait);
+	}
+
+	return rc;
+}
+
+int ide_protect_queue(request_queue_t *q, int unload)
+{
+	ide_drive_t *drive = q->queuedata;
+	struct request rq;
+	u8 args[7], *argbuf = args;
+	int ret = 0;
+	DECLARE_COMPLETION(wait);
+
+	memset(&rq, 0, sizeof(rq));
+	memset(args, 0, sizeof(args));
+
+	if (blk_queue_stopped(q))
+		return -EIO;
+
+	if (unload) {
+		argbuf[0] = 0xe1;
+		argbuf[1] = 0x44;
+		argbuf[3] = 0x4c;
+		argbuf[4] = 0x4e;
+		argbuf[5] = 0x55;
+	} else
+		argbuf[0] = 0xe0;
+
+	/* Issue the park command & freeze */
+	ide_init_drive_cmd(&rq);
+
+	rq.cmd_type = REQ_TYPE_ATA_TASK;
+	rq.buffer = argbuf;
+	rq.end_io_data = &wait;
+	rq.end_io = ide_end_protect_rq;
+
+	ret = ide_do_drive_cmd(drive, &rq, ide_next);
+	wait_for_completion(&wait);
+
+	if (ret)
+	{
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ide_protect_queue(): Warning: head NOT parked!..\n");
+		ide_unprotect_queue(q);
+		return ret;
+	}
+
+	if (unload) {
+		if (args[3] == 0xc4)
+			printk(KERN_DEBUG "ide_protect_queue(): head parked..\n");
+		else {
+			/* error parking the head */
+			printk(KERN_DEBUG "ide_protect_queue(): head NOT parked!..\n");
+			ret = -EIO;
+			ide_unprotect_queue(q);
+		}
+	} else
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ide_protect_queue(): head park not requested, used standby!..\n");
+
+	return ret;
+}	
+
+int idedisk_issue_protect_fn(request_queue_t *q)
+{
+	ide_drive_t *drive = q->queuedata;
+	int unload;
+
+	/*
+	 * Check capability of the device -
+	 *  - if "idle immediate with unload" is supported we use that, else
+	 *    we use "standby immediate" and live with spinning down the drive..
+	 *    (Word 84, bit 13 of IDENTIFY DEVICE data)
+	 */
+	if (idedisk_protect_method == 1) {
+		unload = 1;	
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "idedisk_issue_protect_fn(): unload method requested, overriding drive capability check..\n");
+	}
+	else if (idedisk_protect_method == 2) {
+		unload = 0;	
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "idedisk_issue_protect_fn(): standby method requested, overriding drive capability check..\n");
+	}
+	else if (drive->id->cfsse & (1 << 13)) {
+		unload = 1;
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "idedisk_issue_protect_fn(): unload support reported by drive..\n");
+	}
+	else {
+		unload = 0;
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "idedisk_issue_protect_fn(): unload support NOT reported by drive!..\n");
+	}
+
+	return ide_protect_queue(q, unload);
+}
+
+int idedisk_issue_unprotect_fn(request_queue_t *q)
+{
+	return ide_unprotect_queue(q);
+}
+
+/*
  * This is tightly woven into the driver->do_special can not touch.
  * DON'T do it again until a total personality rewrite is committed.
  */
@@ -986,6 +1138,9 @@ static void idedisk_setup (ide_drive_t *
 		drive->wcache = 1;
 
 	write_cache(drive, 1);
+
+	blk_queue_issue_protect_fn(drive->queue, idedisk_issue_protect_fn);
+	blk_queue_issue_unprotect_fn(drive->queue, idedisk_issue_unprotect_fn);
 }
 
 static void ide_cacheflush_p(ide_drive_t *drive)
diff --git a/drivers/ide/ide-io.c b/drivers/ide/ide-io.c
index 2614f41..c026ae0 100644
--- a/drivers/ide/ide-io.c
+++ b/drivers/ide/ide-io.c
@@ -1261,6 +1261,17 @@ #endif
 		}
 
 		/*
+		 * Don't accept a request when the queue is stopped (unless we
+		 * are resuming from suspend). Prevents existing queue entries 
+		 * being processed after queue is stopped by the hard disk 
+		 * protection mechanism...
+		 */
+		if (test_bit(QUEUE_FLAG_STOPPED, &drive->queue->queue_flags) && !blk_pm_resume_request(rq)) {
+			hwgroup->busy = 0;
+			break;
+		}
+
+		/*
 		 * Sanity: don't accept a request that isn't a PM request
 		 * if we are currently power managed. This is very important as
 		 * blk_stop_queue() doesn't prevent the elv_next_request()
@@ -1744,6 +1755,9 @@ int ide_do_drive_cmd (ide_drive_t *drive
 		where = ELEVATOR_INSERT_FRONT;
 		rq->cmd_flags |= REQ_PREEMPT;
 	}
+	if (action == ide_next)
+		where = ELEVATOR_INSERT_FRONT;
+
 	__elv_add_request(drive->queue, rq, where, 0);
 	ide_do_request(hwgroup, IDE_NO_IRQ);
 	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ide_lock, flags);
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
index d2c02df..5ab5b0b 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
@@ -2258,3 +2258,166 @@ void scsi_kunmap_atomic_sg(void *virt)
 	kunmap_atomic(virt, KM_BIO_SRC_IRQ);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(scsi_kunmap_atomic_sg);
+
+/*
+ * Structure required for synchronous io completion after queue freezing
+ */
+struct scsi_protect_io_context_sync {
+	struct scsi_device *sdev;
+	int result;
+	char *sense;
+	struct completion *waiting;
+};
+
+/*
+ * scsi_protect_wait_done()
+ * Command completion handler for scsi_protect_queue().
+ *
+ * Unable to call scsi_internal_device_block() as
+ * scsi_end_request() already has the spinlock. So,
+ * we put the necessary functionality inline.
+ *
+ * todo:
+ *  - we block the queue regardless of success and rely on the
+ *    scsi_protect_queue function to unblock if the command
+ *    failed... should we also inspect here?
+ */
+static void scsi_protect_wait_done(void *data, char *sense, int result, int resid)
+{
+	struct scsi_protect_io_context_sync *siocs = data;
+	struct completion *waiting = siocs->waiting;
+	request_queue_t *q = siocs->sdev->request_queue;
+
+	siocs->waiting = NULL;
+	siocs->result = result;
+	memcpy(siocs->sense, sense, SCSI_SENSE_BUFFERSIZE);
+
+	if (!scsi_device_set_state(siocs->sdev, SDEV_BLOCK))
+		blk_stop_queue(q);
+
+	complete(waiting);
+}
+
+/*
+ * scsi_unprotect_queue()
+ *  - release the queue that was previously blocked
+ */
+int scsi_unprotect_queue(request_queue_t *q)
+{
+	struct scsi_device *sdev = q->queuedata;
+	int rc = 0, pending = 0;
+	u8 scsi_cmd[MAX_COMMAND_SIZE];
+	struct scsi_sense_hdr sshdr;
+
+	if (sdev->sdev_state != SDEV_BLOCK)
+		return -ENXIO;
+
+	/* Are there any pending jobs on the queue? */
+	pending = ((q->rq.count[READ] > 0) || (q->rq.count[WRITE] > 0)) ? 1 : 0;
+
+	rc = scsi_internal_device_unblock(sdev);
+	if (rc)
+		return rc;
+
+	if (!pending) {
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "scsi_unprotect_queue(): No pending I/O, re-enabling power management..\n");
+
+		memset(scsi_cmd, 0, sizeof(scsi_cmd));
+		scsi_cmd[0]  = ATA_16;
+		scsi_cmd[1]  = (3 << 1); /* Non-data */
+		/* scsi_cmd[2] is already 0 -- no off.line, cc, or data xfer */
+		scsi_cmd[14] = 0xe5; /* CHECK_POWER_MODE1 */
+
+		/* Good values for timeout and retries?  Values below
+   		   from scsi_ioctl_send_command() for default case... */
+		if (scsi_execute_req(sdev, scsi_cmd, DMA_NONE, NULL, 0, &sshdr,
+		   		     (10*HZ), 5))
+			rc = -EIO;
+	}
+	return rc;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(scsi_unprotect_queue);
+
+/*
+ * scsi_protect_queue()
+ *  - build and issue the park/standby command..
+ *  - queue is blocked during command completion handler
+ */
+int scsi_protect_queue(request_queue_t *q, int unload)
+{
+	struct scsi_protect_io_context_sync siocs;
+	struct scsi_device *sdev = q->queuedata;
+	int rc = 0;
+	u8 args[7];
+	u8 scsi_cmd[MAX_COMMAND_SIZE];
+	unsigned char sense[SCSI_SENSE_BUFFERSIZE];
+	unsigned char *desc;
+	DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK(wait);
+
+	if (sdev->sdev_state != SDEV_RUNNING)
+		return -ENXIO;
+
+	memset(args, 0, sizeof(args));
+	memset(sense, 0, sizeof(sense));
+
+	if (unload) {
+		args[0] = 0xe1;
+		args[1] = 0x44;
+		args[3] = 0x4c;
+		args[4] = 0x4e;
+		args[5] = 0x55;
+	} else
+		args[0] = 0xe0;
+
+	memset(scsi_cmd, 0, sizeof(scsi_cmd));
+	scsi_cmd[0]  = ATA_16;
+	scsi_cmd[1]  = (3 << 1); /* Non-data */
+	scsi_cmd[2]  = 0x20;     /* no off.line, or data xfer, request cc */
+	scsi_cmd[4]  = args[1];
+	scsi_cmd[6]  = args[2];
+	scsi_cmd[8]  = args[3];
+	scsi_cmd[10] = args[4];
+	scsi_cmd[12] = args[5];
+	scsi_cmd[14] = args[0];
+	siocs.sdev = sdev;
+	siocs.sense = sense;
+	siocs.waiting = &wait;
+
+	scsi_execute_async(sdev, scsi_cmd, COMMAND_SIZE(scsi_cmd[0]),
+			   DMA_NONE, NULL, 0, 0, (10*HZ), 5,
+			   &siocs, &scsi_protect_wait_done, GFP_NOWAIT);
+	wait_for_completion(&wait);
+
+	if (siocs.result != ((DRIVER_SENSE << 24) + SAM_STAT_CHECK_CONDITION)) {
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "scsi_protect_queue(): head NOT parked!..\n");
+		scsi_unprotect_queue(q);		/* just in case we still managed to block */
+		rc = -EIO;
+		goto out;
+	}
+
+	desc = sense + 8;
+
+	/* Retrieve data from check condition */
+	args[1] = desc[3];
+	args[2] = desc[5];
+	args[3] = desc[7];
+	args[4] = desc[9];
+	args[5] = desc[11];
+	args[0] = desc[13];
+
+	if (unload) {
+		if (args[3] == 0xc4)
+			printk(KERN_DEBUG "scsi_protect_queue(): head parked..\n");
+		else {
+			/* error parking the head */
+			printk(KERN_DEBUG "scsi_protect_queue(): head NOT parked!..\n");
+			rc = -EIO;
+			scsi_unprotect_queue(q);
+		}
+	} else
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "scsi_protect_queue(): head park not requested, used standby!..\n");
+
+out:
+	return rc;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(scsi_protect_queue);
diff --git a/include/linux/ata.h b/include/linux/ata.h
index d894419..7b943d2 100644
--- a/include/linux/ata.h
+++ b/include/linux/ata.h
@@ -282,6 +282,7 @@ #define ata_id_is_sata(id)	((id)[93] == 
 #define ata_id_rahead_enabled(id) ((id)[85] & (1 << 6))
 #define ata_id_wcache_enabled(id) ((id)[85] & (1 << 5))
 #define ata_id_hpa_enabled(id)	((id)[85] & (1 << 10))
+#define ata_id_has_unload(id)   ((id)[84] & (1 << 13))
 #define ata_id_has_fua(id)	((id)[84] & (1 << 6))
 #define ata_id_has_flush(id)	((id)[83] & (1 << 12))
 #define ata_id_has_flush_ext(id) ((id)[83] & (1 << 13))
diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
index 7bfcde2..6f0120c 100644
--- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
+++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
@@ -346,6 +346,8 @@ typedef void (activity_fn) (void *data, 
 typedef int (issue_flush_fn) (request_queue_t *, struct gendisk *, sector_t *);
 typedef void (prepare_flush_fn) (request_queue_t *, struct request *);
 typedef void (softirq_done_fn)(struct request *);
+typedef int (issue_protect_fn) (request_queue_t *);
+typedef int (issue_unprotect_fn) (request_queue_t *);
 
 enum blk_queue_state {
 	Queue_down,
@@ -388,6 +390,8 @@ struct request_queue
 	issue_flush_fn		*issue_flush_fn;
 	prepare_flush_fn	*prepare_flush_fn;
 	softirq_done_fn		*softirq_done_fn;
+	issue_protect_fn	*issue_protect_fn;
+	issue_unprotect_fn	*issue_unprotect_fn;
 
 	/*
 	 * Dispatch queue sorting
@@ -403,6 +407,13 @@ struct request_queue
 	unsigned long		unplug_delay;	/* After this many jiffies */
 	struct work_struct	unplug_work;
 
+	/*
+	 * Auto-unfreeze state
+	 */
+	struct timer_list	unfreeze_timer;
+	int			max_unfreeze;	/* At most this many seconds */
+	struct work_struct	unfreeze_work;
+
 	struct backing_dev_info	backing_dev_info;
 
 	/*
@@ -760,6 +771,8 @@ extern int blk_do_ordered(request_queue_
 extern unsigned blk_ordered_cur_seq(request_queue_t *);
 extern unsigned blk_ordered_req_seq(struct request *);
 extern void blk_ordered_complete_seq(request_queue_t *, unsigned, int);
+extern void blk_queue_issue_protect_fn(request_queue_t *, issue_protect_fn *);
+extern void blk_queue_issue_unprotect_fn(request_queue_t *, issue_unprotect_fn *);
 
 extern int blk_rq_map_sg(request_queue_t *, struct request *, struct scatterlist *);
 extern void blk_dump_rq_flags(struct request *, char *);
diff --git a/include/linux/ide.h b/include/linux/ide.h
index 9c20502..8613b94 100644
--- a/include/linux/ide.h
+++ b/include/linux/ide.h
@@ -1090,6 +1090,7 @@ extern u64 ide_get_error_location(ide_dr
  */
 typedef enum {
 	ide_wait,	/* insert rq at end of list, and wait for it */
+	ide_next,	/* insert rq immediately after current request */
 	ide_preempt,	/* insert rq in front of current request */
 	ide_head_wait,	/* insert rq in front of current request and wait for it */
 	ide_end		/* insert rq at end of list, but don't wait for it */

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
  2006-11-27 18:31     ` is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above? Elias Oltmanns
@ 2006-11-30 17:19       ` Pavel Machek
  2006-11-30 17:51         ` Shem Multinymous
  2006-12-01 14:19         ` Elias Oltmanns
  2006-11-30 18:43       ` Jens Axboe
  1 sibling, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Machek @ 2006-11-30 17:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Elias Oltmanns; +Cc: Jens Axboe, Christoph Schmid, linux-kernel

Hi!

> >> > After some googeling and digging in gamne i read that someone said that
> >> > there are plans for some generic support for HD-parking in the kernel
> >> > and thus making such patches obsolete.
> [...]
> >> I'm afraid we need your help with development here. Porting old patch
> >> to 2.6.19-rc6 should be easy, and then you can start 'how do I
> >> makethis generic' debate.
> >
> > 2.6.19 will finally have the generic block layer commands, so this can
> > be implemented properly.
> 
> Eventually, I've ported the patch to 2.6.19-rc6 (attached). However,
> I'll need some gentle guidance by you developers for the next steps,
> I'm afraid. What exactly do you mean by "making this generic".
> Perhaps, you could give me a hint as to which generic block layer
> commands you have in mind that should be used in such a patch.
> 
> 
> Here is a short description of what the patch does in its current
> shape:
> 
> 1. Adds functions to ide-disk.c and scsi_lib.c that issue an idle
>    immediate with head unload or a standby immediate command as
>    appropriate and stop the queue on command completion.

Can we get short Documentation/ patch?

> +       if (!pending)
> +	       q->issue_unprotect_fn(q);

Minor tab vs spaces problem here.

> +	spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
> +       return queue_var_show(seconds, (page));

And here.

> +static ssize_t queue_protect_store(struct request_queue *q, const char *page, size_t count)
> +{

80 colums would be nice.

> +	if(freeze>0) {

...and space between if and (

> +static struct queue_sysfs_entry queue_protect_entry = {
> +       .attr = {.name = "protect", .mode = S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR },

And space between { and . .

> +	/* create the attribute */
> +	error = sysfs_create_file(&q->kobj, &queue_protect_entry.attr);
> +	if(error){

if (error) {

> +module_param_named(protect_method, libata_protect_method, int, 0444);
> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(protect_method, "hdaps disk protection method  (0=autodetect, 1=unload, 2=standby)");

Should this be configurable by module parameter? Why not tell each
unload what to do?

Is /sys interface right thing to do?

> +	if (libata_protect_method == 1) {
> +		unload = 1;	
> +		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ata_scsi_issue_protect_fn(): unload method requested, overriding drive capability check..\n");
> +	}

} and else on same line...

> +	else if (libata_protect_method == 2) {
> +		unload = 0;	
> +		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ata_scsi_issue_protect_fn(): standby method requested, overriding drive capability check..\n");
> +	}
> +	else if (ata_id_has_unload(dev->id)) {
> +		unload = 1;
> +		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ata_scsi_issue_protect_fn(): unload support reported by drive..\n");
> +	}
> +	else {
> +		unload = 0;
> +		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ata_scsi_issue_protect_fn(): unload support NOT reported by drive!..\n");
> +	}

Can we consolidate the strings somehow?

> --- a/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c
> +++ b/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c
> @@ -72,6 +72,10 @@ #include <asm/uaccess.h>
>  #include <asm/io.h>
>  #include <asm/div64.h>
>  
> +int idedisk_protect_method = 0;
> +module_param_named(protect_method, idedisk_protect_method, int, 0444);
> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(protect_method, "hdaps disk protection method (0=autodetect, 1=unload, 2=standby)");
> +

Oh and do not mention hdaps, there are more different accelerometer
types.

> +	/*
> +	 * Auto-unfreeze state
> +	 */
> +	struct timer_list	unfreeze_timer;
> +	int			max_unfreeze;	/* At most this many seconds */
> +	struct work_struct	unfreeze_work;
> +
>  	struct backing_dev_info	backing_dev_info;
>

Should we have kernel doing auto-unfreeze? Perhaps we can just mlock()
the daemon?
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
  2006-11-30 17:19       ` Pavel Machek
@ 2006-11-30 17:51         ` Shem Multinymous
  2006-12-01 14:19         ` Elias Oltmanns
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Shem Multinymous @ 2006-11-30 17:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pavel Machek; +Cc: Elias Oltmanns, Jens Axboe, Christoph Schmid, linux-kernel

On 11/30/06, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
> Should we have kernel doing auto-unfreeze? Perhaps we can just mlock()
> the daemon?

You could be in the middle of suspend with by-now-frozen userspace; or
maybe the daemon had a SEGV or was accidentally killed. Can't trust
that.

  Shem

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
  2006-11-27 18:31     ` is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above? Elias Oltmanns
  2006-11-30 17:19       ` Pavel Machek
@ 2006-11-30 18:43       ` Jens Axboe
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2006-11-30 18:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Elias Oltmanns; +Cc: Pavel Machek, Christoph Schmid, linux-kernel

On Mon, Nov 27 2006, Elias Oltmanns wrote:
> Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 21 2006, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >> Hi!
> >> 
> [...]
> >> > After some googeling and digging in gamne i read that someone said that
> >> > there are plans for some generic support for HD-parking in the kernel
> >> > and thus making such patches obsolete.
> [...]
> >> I'm afraid we need your help with development here. Porting old patch
> >> to 2.6.19-rc6 should be easy, and then you can start 'how do I
> >> makethis generic' debate.
> >
> > 2.6.19 will finally have the generic block layer commands, so this can
> > be implemented properly.
> 
> Eventually, I've ported the patch to 2.6.19-rc6 (attached). However,
> I'll need some gentle guidance by you developers for the next steps,
> I'm afraid. What exactly do you mean by "making this generic".
> Perhaps, you could give me a hint as to which generic block layer
> commands you have in mind that should be used in such a patch.

If you look in <linux/blkdev.h>, you can see the definition of
REQ_TYPE_LINUX_BLOCK and the current sub commands (none are implemented
right now). So you want to add REQ_LB_OPT_PARK (or whatever the name
should be) to implement the freezing operation, and then add support for
the drivers to understand this command and do what they need to do. You
can add block layer helpers to perform the freezing of the actual queue,
to be called when the PARK command completes. You can handle the queue
draining for tagged devices like the barriers do for FUA barriers.


-- 
Jens Axboe


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
  2006-11-30 17:19       ` Pavel Machek
  2006-11-30 17:51         ` Shem Multinymous
@ 2006-12-01 14:19         ` Elias Oltmanns
  2006-12-02 11:57           ` Pavel Machek
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Elias Oltmanns @ 2006-12-01 14:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pavel Machek; +Cc: Jens Axboe, Christoph Schmid, linux-kernel

Hi Pavel,

thanks a lot for your first review. See comments below.

Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
> Hi!
>
[...]
>> Here is a short description of what the patch does in its current
>> shape:
>> 
>> 1. Adds functions to ide-disk.c and scsi_lib.c that issue an idle
>>    immediate with head unload or a standby immediate command as
>>    appropriate and stop the queue on command completion.
>
> Can we get short Documentation/ patch?

Sure. Would Documentation/block/disk-protection.txt be an appropriate
location?

[...]
>> +module_param_named(protect_method, libata_protect_method, int, 0444);
>> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(protect_method, "hdaps disk protection method  (0=autodetect, 1=unload, 2=standby)");
>
> Should this be configurable by module parameter? Why not tell each
> unload what to do?

As I understand, ATA specs expect drives to indicate whether they
support the head unload feature of the idle immediate command or not.
Unfortunately, a whole lot of them doesn't, well, mine doesn't anyway.
Since I know that my drive does actually support head unloading, I'd
like to tell the module so in order to prevent it from falling back to
standby immediate. Applications that issue disk parking requests
should not be bothered with this issue, in my opinion.

>
> Is /sys interface right thing to do?

Probably, you're right here. Since this feature is actually drive
specific, it should not really be set globally as a libata or ide-disk
parameter but specifically for each drive connected. Perhaps we should
add another attribute to /sys/block/*/queue or enhance the scope of
/sys/block/*/queue/protect?

[...]
>> +	else if (libata_protect_method == 2) {
>> +		unload = 0;	
>> +		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ata_scsi_issue_protect_fn(): standby method requested, overriding drive capability check..\n");
>> +	}
>> +	else if (ata_id_has_unload(dev->id)) {
>> +		unload = 1;
>> +		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ata_scsi_issue_protect_fn(): unload support reported by drive..\n");
>> +	}
>> +	else {
>> +		unload = 0;
>> +		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ata_scsi_issue_protect_fn(): unload support NOT reported by drive!..\n");
>> +	}
>
> Can we consolidate the strings somehow?

Actually, I'd like to move this to the initialisation sequence of the
drive. I still have to figure out how to do this properly.

[...]
>> +	/*
>> +	 * Auto-unfreeze state
>> +	 */
>> +	struct timer_list	unfreeze_timer;
>> +	int			max_unfreeze;	/* At most this many seconds */
>> +	struct work_struct	unfreeze_work;
>> +
>>  	struct backing_dev_info	backing_dev_info;
>>
>
> Should we have kernel doing auto-unfreeze? Perhaps we can just mlock()
> the daemon?
> 								Pavel

I'd strongly second Shem's comments on this. Besides, anybody with
root privileges can issue diks park requests, not just hdapsd. Please
note that this is not a hard timeout as userspace can always refresh
the timer before it has actually expired. On the other hand I would
not want to rely on user space to unfreeze my drives.

Regards

Elias

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
  2006-12-01 14:19         ` Elias Oltmanns
@ 2006-12-02 11:57           ` Pavel Machek
  2006-12-10  1:02             ` Elias Oltmanns
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Machek @ 2006-12-02 11:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Elias Oltmanns; +Cc: Jens Axboe, Christoph Schmid, linux-kernel

Hi!

> >> 1. Adds functions to ide-disk.c and scsi_lib.c that issue an idle
> >>    immediate with head unload or a standby immediate command as
> >>    appropriate and stop the queue on command completion.
> >
> > Can we get short Documentation/ patch?
> 
> Sure. Would Documentation/block/disk-protection.txt be an appropriate
> location?

Yes.

> >> +module_param_named(protect_method, libata_protect_method, int, 0444);
> >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(protect_method, "hdaps disk protection method  (0=autodetect, 1=unload, 2=standby)");
> >
> > Should this be configurable by module parameter? Why not tell each
> > unload what to do?
> 
> As I understand, ATA specs expect drives to indicate whether they
> support the head unload feature of the idle immediate command or not.
> Unfortunately, a whole lot of them doesn't, well, mine doesn't anyway.
> Since I know that my drive does actually support head unloading, I'd
> like to tell the module so in order to prevent it from falling back to
> standby immediate. Applications that issue disk parking requests
> should not be bothered with this issue, in my opinion.

What if you have two disks and one supports head unload and second
does not?

> > Is /sys interface right thing to do?
> 
> Probably, you're right here. Since this feature is actually drive
> specific, it should not really be set globally as a libata or ide-disk
> parameter but specifically for each drive connected. Perhaps we should
> add another attribute to /sys/block/*/queue or enhance the scope of
> /sys/block/*/queue/protect?

Certainly better than current solution. Or maybe ioctl similar to wat
hdparm uses?
							Pavel
-- 
Thanks for all the (sleeping) penguins.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
  2006-12-02 11:57           ` Pavel Machek
@ 2006-12-10  1:02             ` Elias Oltmanns
  2006-12-10  1:16               ` Elias Oltmanns
  2007-02-04 20:41               ` Pavel Machek
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Elias Oltmanns @ 2006-12-10  1:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pavel Machek; +Cc: Jens Axboe, Christoph Schmid, linux-kernel

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2230 bytes --]

Hi Pavel,

Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
>> >> +module_param_named(protect_method, libata_protect_method, int, 0444);
>> >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(protect_method, "hdaps disk protection method  (0=autodetect, 1=unload, 2=standby)");
>> >
>> > Should this be configurable by module parameter? Why not tell each
>> > unload what to do?
[...]
>> > Is /sys interface right thing to do?
>> 
>> Probably, you're right here. Since this feature is actually drive
>> specific, it should not really be set globally as a libata or ide-disk
>> parameter but specifically for each drive connected. Perhaps we should
>> add another attribute to /sys/block/*/queue or enhance the scope of
>> /sys/block/*/queue/protect?
>
> Certainly better than current solution. Or maybe ioctl similar to wat
> hdparm uses?
> 							Pavel

I'm not quite sure what you have in mind wrt ioctls. I'm still
convinced that the administrator should take a conscious decision when
forcing an idle immediate with unload feature on a drive which doesn't
announce this capability according to the specs. This is because I
have no idea as to how drives might react if they don't support it.
Perhaps we should consult linux-ide on this topic.

Anyway, this is the reason why I favour the sysfs approach. The
decision can be made, for instance, in a udev rule during device
setup.

So, here is a patch in which your remarks and suggestions have been
incorporated. Additionally, I've added the requested kernel doc file
and another sysfs attribute called protect_method. The usage of this
attribute is described in Documentation/block/disk-protection.txt.

Patch applies to 2.6.19.

Signed-off-by: Elias Oltmanns <eo@nebensachen.de>
---
 Documentation/block/disk-protection.txt |   79 +++++++
 block/ll_rw_blk.c                       |  224 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c               |   29 ++
 drivers/ide/ide-disk.c                  |  142 +++++++++++++
 drivers/ide/ide-io.c                    |   14 +
 drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c                 |  163 ++++++++++++++++
 include/linux/ata.h                     |    1
 include/linux/blkdev.h                  |   14 +
 include/linux/ide.h                     |    1
 9 files changed, 667 insertions(+)

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: hdaps_protect-2.6.19-2.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 26125 bytes --]

diff --git a/Documentation/block/disk-protection.txt b/Documentation/block/disk-protection.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..508cc5b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/block/disk-protection.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+Hard disk protection
+====================
+
+
+Intro
+-----
+ATA/ATAPI-7 specifies the IDLE IMMEDIATE command with UNLOAD FEATURE.
+Issuing this command should cause the drive to switch to idle mode and
+unload disk heads. This feature is being used in modern laptops in
+conjunction with accelerometers and appropriate software to implement
+a shock protection facility. The idea is to stop all I/O operations on
+the internal hard drive and park its heads on the ramp when critical
+situations are anticipated. The desire to have such a feature
+available on GNU/Linux systems has been the original motivation to
+implement a generic disk parking interface in the Linux kernel.
+
+
+The interface
+-------------
+The interface works as follows: Writing an integer value to
+/sys/block/*/queue/protect will park the respective drive and freeze
+the block layer queue for the specified number of seconds. When the
+timeout expires and no further disk park request has been issued in
+the meantime, the queue is unfrozen and accumulated I/O operations are
+performed.
+
+IMPORTANT NOTE:
+Not all ATA drives implement IDLE IMMEDIATE with UNLOAD FEATURE and
+quite a few of those that do so, don't report this capability as
+described in the specs. When a disk park has been requested through
+sysfs as described above, the kernel will try to determine if the
+drive supports the UNLOAD FEATURE by default. The kernel will only
+rely on the IDLE IMMEDIATE with UNLOAD FEATURE command if it is
+convinced that this command is actually supported by the disk drive;
+otherwise, it will fall back to STANDBY IMMEDIATE. Resuming from the
+latter will take much longer and it is generally more likely to have a
+negative impact on the drive's lifetime due to the inclease of spin
+down and up cycles. If you want to use this interface in a shock
+protection framework and you know that your drive does indeed support
+the IDLE IMMEDIATE with UNLOAD FEATURE command despite not saying so,
+you can force the kernel to issue that command by doing the following
+on the command line:
+# echo -n unload > /sys/block/sda/queue/protect_method
+(replace sda by the drive identifier as appropriate).
+
+/sys/block/*/queue/protect_method accepts auto, unload and standby
+respectively. Reading from protect_method shows the available options
+surrounding the active one with brackets. When auto is active, this
+will change to whatever the kernel sees fit after the next disk park
+command has been issued.
+
+
+References
+----------
+
+There are several laptops from different brands featuring shock
+protection capabilities. As manufacturers have refused to support open
+source development of the required software components so far, Linux
+support for shock protection varies considerably between different
+hardware implementations. Ideally, this section should contain a list
+of poiters at different projects aiming at an implementation of shock
+protection on different systeems. Unfortunately, I only know of a
+single project which, although still considered experimental, is fit
+for use. Please feel free to add projects that have been the victims
+of my ignorance.
+
+- http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/HDAPS
+  See this page for information about Linux support of the hard disk
+  active protection syystem as implemented in IBM/Lenovo Thinkpads.
+
+
+CREDITS
+-------
+
+The patch to implement the interface described in this file has
+originally been published by Jon Escombe <lists@dresco.co.uk>.
+
+
+05 Dec 2006, Elias Oltmanns <eo@nebensachen.de>
diff --git a/block/ll_rw_blk.c b/block/ll_rw_blk.c
index 9eaee66..a03ed2b 100644
--- a/block/ll_rw_blk.c
+++ b/block/ll_rw_blk.c
@@ -36,10 +36,14 @@ #include <scsi/scsi_cmnd.h>
 
 static void blk_unplug_work(void *data);
 static void blk_unplug_timeout(unsigned long data);
+static void blk_unfreeze_work(void *data);
+static void blk_unfreeze_timeout(unsigned long data);
 static void drive_stat_acct(struct request *rq, int nr_sectors, int new_io);
 static void init_request_from_bio(struct request *req, struct bio *bio);
 static int __make_request(request_queue_t *q, struct bio *bio);
 static struct io_context *current_io_context(gfp_t gfp_flags, int node);
+static int blk_protect_register(request_queue_t *q);
+static void blk_protect_unregister(request_queue_t *q);
 
 /*
  * For the allocated request tables
@@ -232,6 +236,16 @@ void blk_queue_make_request(request_queu
 	q->unplug_timer.function = blk_unplug_timeout;
 	q->unplug_timer.data = (unsigned long)q;
 
+	q->max_unfreeze = 30;
+
+	INIT_WORK(&q->unfreeze_work, blk_unfreeze_work, q);
+
+	q->unfreeze_timer.function = blk_unfreeze_timeout;
+	q->unfreeze_timer.data = (unsigned long)q;
+
+	/* Set protect_method to auto detection initially */
+	q->protect_method = 2;
+
 	/*
 	 * by default assume old behaviour and bounce for any highmem page
 	 */
@@ -324,6 +338,18 @@ void blk_queue_issue_flush_fn(request_qu
 
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_queue_issue_flush_fn);
 
+void blk_queue_issue_protect_fn(request_queue_t *q, issue_protect_fn *ipf)
+{
+	q->issue_protect_fn = ipf;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_queue_issue_protect_fn);
+
+void blk_queue_issue_unprotect_fn(request_queue_t *q, issue_unprotect_fn *iuf)
+{
+	q->issue_unprotect_fn = iuf;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_queue_issue_unprotect_fn);
+
 /*
  * Cache flushing for ordered writes handling
  */
@@ -1842,6 +1868,7 @@ request_queue_t *blk_alloc_queue_node(gf
 
 	memset(q, 0, sizeof(*q));
 	init_timer(&q->unplug_timer);
+	init_timer(&q->unfreeze_timer);
 
 	snprintf(q->kobj.name, KOBJ_NAME_LEN, "%s", "queue");
 	q->kobj.ktype = &queue_ktype;
@@ -3917,6 +3944,7 @@ int blk_register_queue(struct gendisk *d
 		return ret;
 	}
 
+	blk_protect_register(q);
 	return 0;
 }
 
@@ -3925,6 +3953,7 @@ void blk_unregister_queue(struct gendisk
 	request_queue_t *q = disk->queue;
 
 	if (q && q->request_fn) {
+		blk_protect_unregister(q);
 		elv_unregister_queue(q);
 
 		kobject_uevent(&q->kobj, KOBJ_REMOVE);
@@ -3932,3 +3961,198 @@ void blk_unregister_queue(struct gendisk
 		kobject_put(&disk->kobj);
 	}
 }
+
+/*
+ * Issue lower level unprotect function if no timers are pending.
+ */
+static void blk_unfreeze_work(void *data)
+{
+	request_queue_t *q = (request_queue_t *) data;
+	int pending;
+	unsigned long flags;
+
+	spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags);
+	pending = timer_pending(&q->unfreeze_timer);
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(q->queue_lock, flags);
+	if (!pending)
+		q->issue_unprotect_fn(q);
+}
+
+/*
+ * Called when the queue freeze timeout expires...
+ */
+static void blk_unfreeze_timeout(unsigned long data)
+{
+	request_queue_t *q = (request_queue_t *) data;
+
+	kblockd_schedule_work(&q->unfreeze_work);
+}
+
+/*
+ * The lower level driver parks and freezes the queue, and this block layer
+ *  function sets up the freeze timeout timer on return. If the queue is
+ *  already frozen then this is called to extend the timer...
+ */
+void blk_freeze_queue(request_queue_t *q, int seconds)
+{
+	/* Don't accept arbitrarily long freezes */
+	if (seconds >= q->max_unfreeze)
+		seconds = q->max_unfreeze;
+	/* set/reset the timer */
+	mod_timer(&q->unfreeze_timer, msecs_to_jiffies(seconds*1000) + jiffies);
+}
+
+/*
+ * When reading the 'protect' attribute, we return seconds remaining
+ * before unfreeze timeout expires
+ */
+static ssize_t queue_protect_show(struct request_queue *q, char *page)
+{
+	unsigned int seconds = 0;
+
+	spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+	if (blk_queue_stopped(q) && timer_pending(&q->unfreeze_timer))
+		/*
+		 * Adding 1 in order to guarantee nonzero value until timer
+		 * has actually expired.
+		 */
+		seconds = jiffies_to_msecs(q->unfreeze_timer.expires
+					   - jiffies) / 1000 + 1;
+	spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+	return queue_var_show(seconds, (page));
+}
+
+/*
+ * When writing the 'protect' attribute, input is the number of seconds
+ * to freeze the queue for. We call a lower level helper function to
+ * park the heads and freeze/block the queue, then we make a block layer
+ * call to setup the thaw timeout. If input is 0, then we thaw the queue.
+ */
+static ssize_t queue_protect_store(struct request_queue *q,
+				   const char *page, size_t count)
+{
+	unsigned long freeze = 0;
+
+	queue_var_store(&freeze, page, count);
+
+	if (freeze>0) {
+		/* Park and freeze */
+		if (!blk_queue_stopped(q))
+			q->issue_protect_fn(q);
+		/* set / reset the thaw timer */
+		spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+		blk_freeze_queue(q, freeze);
+		spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+	} else {
+		spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+		freeze = del_timer(&q->unfreeze_timer);
+		spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+		if (freeze)
+			q->issue_unprotect_fn(q);
+	}
+
+	return count;
+}
+
+static ssize_t
+queue_str_show(char *page, char *str, int status)
+{
+	ssize_t len;
+
+	if (status & 1)
+		len = sprintf(page, "[%s]", str);
+	else
+		len = sprintf(page, "%s", str);
+	if (status & 2)
+		len += sprintf(page+len, "\n");
+	else
+		len += sprintf(page+len, " ");
+	return len;
+}
+
+/*
+ * Returns current protect_method.
+ */
+static ssize_t queue_protect_method_show(struct request_queue *q, char *page)
+{
+	int len = 0;
+	int unload = q->protect_method;
+
+	len += queue_str_show(page+len, "auto", (unload & 2) >> 1);
+	len += queue_str_show(page+len, "unload", unload & 1);
+	len += queue_str_show(page+len, "standby", !unload ? 3 : 2);
+	return len;
+}
+
+/*
+ * Stores the device protect method.
+ */
+static ssize_t queue_protect_method_store(struct request_queue *q,
+				   const char *page, size_t count)
+{
+	spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+	if (!strcmp(page, "auto") || !strcmp(page, "auto\n"))
+		q->protect_method = 2;
+	else if (!strcmp(page, "unload") || !strcmp(page, "unload\n"))
+		q->protect_method = 1;
+	else if (!strcmp(page, "standby") || !strcmp(page, "standby\n"))
+		q->protect_method = 0;
+	else {
+		spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+		return -EINVAL;
+	}
+	spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+	return count;
+}
+
+static struct queue_sysfs_entry queue_protect_entry = {
+	.attr = { .name = "protect", .mode = S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR },
+	.show = queue_protect_show,
+	.store = queue_protect_store,
+};
+static struct queue_sysfs_entry queue_protect_method_entry = {
+	.attr = { .name = "protect_method", .mode = S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR },
+	.show = queue_protect_method_show,
+	.store = queue_protect_method_store,
+};
+
+static int blk_protect_register(request_queue_t *q)
+{
+	int error = 0;
+
+	/* check that the lower level driver has a protect handler */
+	if (!q->issue_protect_fn)
+		return 1;
+
+	/* create the attributes */
+	error = sysfs_create_file(&q->kobj, &queue_protect_entry.attr);
+	if (error) {
+		printk(KERN_ERR
+		       "blk_protect_register(): failed to create protect queue attribute!\n");
+		return error;
+	}
+	kobject_get(&q->kobj);
+
+	error = sysfs_create_file(&q->kobj, &queue_protect_method_entry.attr);
+	if (error) {
+		printk(KERN_ERR
+		       "blk_protect_register(): failed to create protect_method attribute!\n");
+		return error;
+	}
+	kobject_get(&q->kobj);
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static void blk_protect_unregister(request_queue_t *q)
+{
+	/* check that the lower level driver has a protect handler */
+	if (!q->issue_protect_fn)
+		return;
+
+	/* remove the attributes */
+	sysfs_remove_file(&q->kobj, &queue_protect_method_entry.attr);
+	kobject_put(&q->kobj);
+	sysfs_remove_file(&q->kobj, &queue_protect_entry.attr);
+	kobject_put(&q->kobj);
+}
diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
index 47ea111..4dd00ca 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
@@ -841,6 +841,33 @@ static void ata_scsi_dev_config(struct s
 	}
 }
 
+extern int scsi_protect_queue(request_queue_t *q, int unload);
+extern int scsi_unprotect_queue(request_queue_t *q);
+
+static int ata_scsi_issue_protect_fn(request_queue_t *q)
+{
+	struct scsi_device *sdev = q->queuedata;
+	struct ata_port *ap = (struct ata_port *) &sdev->host->hostdata[0];
+	struct ata_device *dev = &ap->device[sdev->id];
+	int unload = q->protect_method;
+	unsigned long flags;
+
+	if (unload == 2) {
+		unload = ata_id_has_unload(dev->id) ? 1 : 0;
+		spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags);
+		q->protect_method = unload;
+		spin_unlock_irqrestore(q->queue_lock, flags);
+	}
+
+	/* call scsi_protect_queue, requesting either unload or standby */
+	return scsi_protect_queue(q, unload);
+}
+
+static int ata_scsi_issue_unprotect_fn(request_queue_t *q)
+{
+	return scsi_unprotect_queue(q);
+}
+
 /**
  *	ata_scsi_slave_config - Set SCSI device attributes
  *	@sdev: SCSI device to examine
@@ -864,6 +891,8 @@ int ata_scsi_slave_config(struct scsi_de
 
 	if (dev)
 		ata_scsi_dev_config(sdev, dev);
+	blk_queue_issue_protect_fn(sdev->request_queue, ata_scsi_issue_protect_fn);	
+	blk_queue_issue_unprotect_fn(sdev->request_queue, ata_scsi_issue_unprotect_fn);	
 
 	return 0;	/* scsi layer doesn't check return value, sigh */
 }
diff --git a/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c b/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c
index 0a05a37..8094ba0 100644
--- a/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c
+++ b/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c
@@ -731,6 +731,145 @@ static int idedisk_issue_flush(request_q
 }
 
 /*
+ * todo:
+ *  - we freeze the queue regardless of success and rely on the 
+ *    ide_protect_queue function to thaw immediately if the command
+ *    failed (to be consistent with the libata handler)... should 
+ *    we also inspect here?
+ */
+void ide_end_protect_rq(struct request *rq, int error)
+{
+	struct completion *waiting = rq->end_io_data;
+
+	rq->end_io_data = NULL;
+	/* spin lock already accquired */
+	if (!blk_queue_stopped(rq->q))
+		blk_stop_queue(rq->q);
+
+	complete(waiting);
+}
+
+int ide_unprotect_queue(request_queue_t *q)
+{
+	struct request rq;
+	unsigned long flags;
+	int pending = 0, rc = 0;
+	ide_drive_t *drive = q->queuedata;
+	u8 args[7], *argbuf = args;
+
+	if (!blk_queue_stopped(q))
+		return -EIO;
+
+	/* Are there any pending jobs on the queue? */
+	pending = ((q->rq.count[READ] > 0) || (q->rq.count[WRITE] > 0)) ? 1 : 0;
+	
+	spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags);
+	blk_start_queue(q);
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(q->queue_lock, flags);
+
+	/* The unload feature of the IDLE_IMMEDIATE command
+	   temporarily disables HD power management from spinning down
+	   the disk. Any other command will reenable HD pm, so, if
+	   there are no pending jobs on the queue, another
+	   CHECK_POWER_MODE1 command without the unload feature should do
+	   just fine. */
+	if (!pending) {
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ide_unprotect_queue(): No pending I/O, re-enabling power management..\n");
+		memset(args, 0, sizeof(args));
+		argbuf[0] = 0xe5; /* CHECK_POWER_MODE1 */
+		ide_init_drive_cmd(&rq);
+		rq.cmd_type = REQ_TYPE_ATA_TASK;
+		rq.buffer = argbuf;
+		rc = ide_do_drive_cmd(drive, &rq, ide_head_wait);
+	}
+
+	return rc;
+}
+
+int ide_protect_queue(request_queue_t *q, int unload)
+{
+	ide_drive_t *drive = q->queuedata;
+	struct request rq;
+	u8 args[7], *argbuf = args;
+	int ret = 0;
+	DECLARE_COMPLETION(wait);
+
+	memset(&rq, 0, sizeof(rq));
+	memset(args, 0, sizeof(args));
+
+	if (blk_queue_stopped(q))
+		return -EIO;
+
+	if (unload) {
+		argbuf[0] = 0xe1;
+		argbuf[1] = 0x44;
+		argbuf[3] = 0x4c;
+		argbuf[4] = 0x4e;
+		argbuf[5] = 0x55;
+	} else
+		argbuf[0] = 0xe0;
+
+	/* Issue the park command & freeze */
+	ide_init_drive_cmd(&rq);
+
+	rq.cmd_type = REQ_TYPE_ATA_TASK;
+	rq.buffer = argbuf;
+	rq.end_io_data = &wait;
+	rq.end_io = ide_end_protect_rq;
+
+	ret = ide_do_drive_cmd(drive, &rq, ide_next);
+	wait_for_completion(&wait);
+
+	if (ret)
+	{
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ide_protect_queue(): Warning: head NOT parked!..\n");
+		ide_unprotect_queue(q);
+		return ret;
+	}
+
+	if (unload) {
+		if (args[3] == 0xc4)
+			printk(KERN_DEBUG "ide_protect_queue(): head parked..\n");
+		else {
+			/* error parking the head */
+			printk(KERN_DEBUG "ide_protect_queue(): head NOT parked!..\n");
+			ret = -EIO;
+			ide_unprotect_queue(q);
+		}
+	} else
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "ide_protect_queue(): head park not requested, used standby!..\n");
+
+	return ret;
+}	
+
+int idedisk_issue_protect_fn(request_queue_t *q)
+{
+	ide_drive_t *drive = q->queuedata;
+	int unload;
+	unsigned long flags;
+
+	/*
+	 * Check capability of the device -
+	 *  - if "idle immediate with unload" is supported we use that, else
+	 *    we use "standby immediate" and live with spinning down the drive..
+	 *    (Word 84, bit 13 of IDENTIFY DEVICE data)
+	 */
+	if (unload == 2) {
+		unload = drive->id->cfsse & (1 << 13) ? 1 : 0;
+		spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags);
+		q->protect_method = unload;
+		spin_unlock_irqrestore(q->queue_lock, flags);
+	}
+
+	return ide_protect_queue(q, unload);
+}
+
+int idedisk_issue_unprotect_fn(request_queue_t *q)
+{
+	return ide_unprotect_queue(q);
+}
+
+/*
  * This is tightly woven into the driver->do_special can not touch.
  * DON'T do it again until a total personality rewrite is committed.
  */
@@ -986,6 +1125,9 @@ static void idedisk_setup (ide_drive_t *
 		drive->wcache = 1;
 
 	write_cache(drive, 1);
+
+	blk_queue_issue_protect_fn(drive->queue, idedisk_issue_protect_fn);
+	blk_queue_issue_unprotect_fn(drive->queue, idedisk_issue_unprotect_fn);
 }
 
 static void ide_cacheflush_p(ide_drive_t *drive)
diff --git a/drivers/ide/ide-io.c b/drivers/ide/ide-io.c
index 2614f41..c026ae0 100644
--- a/drivers/ide/ide-io.c
+++ b/drivers/ide/ide-io.c
@@ -1261,6 +1261,17 @@ #endif
 		}
 
 		/*
+		 * Don't accept a request when the queue is stopped (unless we
+		 * are resuming from suspend). Prevents existing queue entries 
+		 * being processed after queue is stopped by the hard disk 
+		 * protection mechanism...
+		 */
+		if (test_bit(QUEUE_FLAG_STOPPED, &drive->queue->queue_flags) && !blk_pm_resume_request(rq)) {
+			hwgroup->busy = 0;
+			break;
+		}
+
+		/*
 		 * Sanity: don't accept a request that isn't a PM request
 		 * if we are currently power managed. This is very important as
 		 * blk_stop_queue() doesn't prevent the elv_next_request()
@@ -1744,6 +1755,9 @@ int ide_do_drive_cmd (ide_drive_t *drive
 		where = ELEVATOR_INSERT_FRONT;
 		rq->cmd_flags |= REQ_PREEMPT;
 	}
+	if (action == ide_next)
+		where = ELEVATOR_INSERT_FRONT;
+
 	__elv_add_request(drive->queue, rq, where, 0);
 	ide_do_request(hwgroup, IDE_NO_IRQ);
 	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ide_lock, flags);
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
index 3ac4890..cbb274d 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
@@ -2259,3 +2259,166 @@ void scsi_kunmap_atomic_sg(void *virt)
 	kunmap_atomic(virt, KM_BIO_SRC_IRQ);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(scsi_kunmap_atomic_sg);
+
+/*
+ * Structure required for synchronous io completion after queue freezing
+ */
+struct scsi_protect_io_context_sync {
+	struct scsi_device *sdev;
+	int result;
+	char *sense;
+	struct completion *waiting;
+};
+
+/*
+ * scsi_protect_wait_done()
+ * Command completion handler for scsi_protect_queue().
+ *
+ * Unable to call scsi_internal_device_block() as
+ * scsi_end_request() already has the spinlock. So,
+ * we put the necessary functionality inline.
+ *
+ * todo:
+ *  - we block the queue regardless of success and rely on the
+ *    scsi_protect_queue function to unblock if the command
+ *    failed... should we also inspect here?
+ */
+static void scsi_protect_wait_done(void *data, char *sense, int result, int resid)
+{
+	struct scsi_protect_io_context_sync *siocs = data;
+	struct completion *waiting = siocs->waiting;
+	request_queue_t *q = siocs->sdev->request_queue;
+
+	siocs->waiting = NULL;
+	siocs->result = result;
+	memcpy(siocs->sense, sense, SCSI_SENSE_BUFFERSIZE);
+
+	if (!scsi_device_set_state(siocs->sdev, SDEV_BLOCK))
+		blk_stop_queue(q);
+
+	complete(waiting);
+}
+
+/*
+ * scsi_unprotect_queue()
+ *  - release the queue that was previously blocked
+ */
+int scsi_unprotect_queue(request_queue_t *q)
+{
+	struct scsi_device *sdev = q->queuedata;
+	int rc = 0, pending = 0;
+	u8 scsi_cmd[MAX_COMMAND_SIZE];
+	struct scsi_sense_hdr sshdr;
+
+	if (sdev->sdev_state != SDEV_BLOCK)
+		return -ENXIO;
+
+	/* Are there any pending jobs on the queue? */
+	pending = ((q->rq.count[READ] > 0) || (q->rq.count[WRITE] > 0)) ? 1 : 0;
+
+	rc = scsi_internal_device_unblock(sdev);
+	if (rc)
+		return rc;
+
+	if (!pending) {
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "scsi_unprotect_queue(): No pending I/O, re-enabling power management..\n");
+
+		memset(scsi_cmd, 0, sizeof(scsi_cmd));
+		scsi_cmd[0]  = ATA_16;
+		scsi_cmd[1]  = (3 << 1); /* Non-data */
+		/* scsi_cmd[2] is already 0 -- no off.line, cc, or data xfer */
+		scsi_cmd[14] = 0xe5; /* CHECK_POWER_MODE1 */
+
+		/* Good values for timeout and retries?  Values below
+   		   from scsi_ioctl_send_command() for default case... */
+		if (scsi_execute_req(sdev, scsi_cmd, DMA_NONE, NULL, 0, &sshdr,
+		   		     (10*HZ), 5))
+			rc = -EIO;
+	}
+	return rc;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(scsi_unprotect_queue);
+
+/*
+ * scsi_protect_queue()
+ *  - build and issue the park/standby command..
+ *  - queue is blocked during command completion handler
+ */
+int scsi_protect_queue(request_queue_t *q, int unload)
+{
+	struct scsi_protect_io_context_sync siocs;
+	struct scsi_device *sdev = q->queuedata;
+	int rc = 0;
+	u8 args[7];
+	u8 scsi_cmd[MAX_COMMAND_SIZE];
+	unsigned char sense[SCSI_SENSE_BUFFERSIZE];
+	unsigned char *desc;
+	DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK(wait);
+
+	if (sdev->sdev_state != SDEV_RUNNING)
+		return -ENXIO;
+
+	memset(args, 0, sizeof(args));
+	memset(sense, 0, sizeof(sense));
+
+	if (unload) {
+		args[0] = 0xe1;
+		args[1] = 0x44;
+		args[3] = 0x4c;
+		args[4] = 0x4e;
+		args[5] = 0x55;
+	} else
+		args[0] = 0xe0;
+
+	memset(scsi_cmd, 0, sizeof(scsi_cmd));
+	scsi_cmd[0]  = ATA_16;
+	scsi_cmd[1]  = (3 << 1); /* Non-data */
+	scsi_cmd[2]  = 0x20;     /* no off.line, or data xfer, request cc */
+	scsi_cmd[4]  = args[1];
+	scsi_cmd[6]  = args[2];
+	scsi_cmd[8]  = args[3];
+	scsi_cmd[10] = args[4];
+	scsi_cmd[12] = args[5];
+	scsi_cmd[14] = args[0];
+	siocs.sdev = sdev;
+	siocs.sense = sense;
+	siocs.waiting = &wait;
+
+	scsi_execute_async(sdev, scsi_cmd, COMMAND_SIZE(scsi_cmd[0]),
+			   DMA_NONE, NULL, 0, 0, (10*HZ), 5,
+			   &siocs, &scsi_protect_wait_done, GFP_NOWAIT);
+	wait_for_completion(&wait);
+
+	if (siocs.result != ((DRIVER_SENSE << 24) + SAM_STAT_CHECK_CONDITION)) {
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "scsi_protect_queue(): head NOT parked!..\n");
+		scsi_unprotect_queue(q);		/* just in case we still managed to block */
+		rc = -EIO;
+		goto out;
+	}
+
+	desc = sense + 8;
+
+	/* Retrieve data from check condition */
+	args[1] = desc[3];
+	args[2] = desc[5];
+	args[3] = desc[7];
+	args[4] = desc[9];
+	args[5] = desc[11];
+	args[0] = desc[13];
+
+	if (unload) {
+		if (args[3] == 0xc4)
+			printk(KERN_DEBUG "scsi_protect_queue(): head parked..\n");
+		else {
+			/* error parking the head */
+			printk(KERN_DEBUG "scsi_protect_queue(): head NOT parked!..\n");
+			rc = -EIO;
+			scsi_unprotect_queue(q);
+		}
+	} else
+		printk(KERN_DEBUG "scsi_protect_queue(): head park not requested, used standby!..\n");
+
+out:
+	return rc;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(scsi_protect_queue);
diff --git a/include/linux/ata.h b/include/linux/ata.h
index d894419..7b943d2 100644
--- a/include/linux/ata.h
+++ b/include/linux/ata.h
@@ -282,6 +282,7 @@ #define ata_id_is_sata(id)	((id)[93] == 
 #define ata_id_rahead_enabled(id) ((id)[85] & (1 << 6))
 #define ata_id_wcache_enabled(id) ((id)[85] & (1 << 5))
 #define ata_id_hpa_enabled(id)	((id)[85] & (1 << 10))
+#define ata_id_has_unload(id)   ((id)[84] & (1 << 13))
 #define ata_id_has_fua(id)	((id)[84] & (1 << 6))
 #define ata_id_has_flush(id)	((id)[83] & (1 << 12))
 #define ata_id_has_flush_ext(id) ((id)[83] & (1 << 13))
diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
index 7bfcde2..838e7b0 100644
--- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
+++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
@@ -346,6 +346,8 @@ typedef void (activity_fn) (void *data, 
 typedef int (issue_flush_fn) (request_queue_t *, struct gendisk *, sector_t *);
 typedef void (prepare_flush_fn) (request_queue_t *, struct request *);
 typedef void (softirq_done_fn)(struct request *);
+typedef int (issue_protect_fn) (request_queue_t *);
+typedef int (issue_unprotect_fn) (request_queue_t *);
 
 enum blk_queue_state {
 	Queue_down,
@@ -388,6 +390,8 @@ struct request_queue
 	issue_flush_fn		*issue_flush_fn;
 	prepare_flush_fn	*prepare_flush_fn;
 	softirq_done_fn		*softirq_done_fn;
+	issue_protect_fn	*issue_protect_fn;
+	issue_unprotect_fn	*issue_unprotect_fn;
 
 	/*
 	 * Dispatch queue sorting
@@ -403,6 +407,14 @@ struct request_queue
 	unsigned long		unplug_delay;	/* After this many jiffies */
 	struct work_struct	unplug_work;
 
+	/*
+	 * Auto-unfreeze state
+	 */
+	struct timer_list	unfreeze_timer;
+	int			max_unfreeze;	/* At most this many seconds */
+	struct work_struct	unfreeze_work;
+	int			protect_method;
+
 	struct backing_dev_info	backing_dev_info;
 
 	/*
@@ -760,6 +772,8 @@ extern int blk_do_ordered(request_queue_
 extern unsigned blk_ordered_cur_seq(request_queue_t *);
 extern unsigned blk_ordered_req_seq(struct request *);
 extern void blk_ordered_complete_seq(request_queue_t *, unsigned, int);
+extern void blk_queue_issue_protect_fn(request_queue_t *, issue_protect_fn *);
+extern void blk_queue_issue_unprotect_fn(request_queue_t *, issue_unprotect_fn *);
 
 extern int blk_rq_map_sg(request_queue_t *, struct request *, struct scatterlist *);
 extern void blk_dump_rq_flags(struct request *, char *);
diff --git a/include/linux/ide.h b/include/linux/ide.h
index 9c20502..8613b94 100644
--- a/include/linux/ide.h
+++ b/include/linux/ide.h
@@ -1090,6 +1090,7 @@ extern u64 ide_get_error_location(ide_dr
  */
 typedef enum {
 	ide_wait,	/* insert rq at end of list, and wait for it */
+	ide_next,	/* insert rq immediately after current request */
 	ide_preempt,	/* insert rq in front of current request */
 	ide_head_wait,	/* insert rq in front of current request and wait for it */
 	ide_end		/* insert rq at end of list, but don't wait for it */

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
  2006-12-10  1:02             ` Elias Oltmanns
@ 2006-12-10  1:16               ` Elias Oltmanns
  2006-12-11  8:26                 ` Jens Axboe
  2007-02-04 20:41               ` Pavel Machek
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Elias Oltmanns @ 2006-12-10  1:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jens Axboe; +Cc: Pavel Machek, Christoph Schmid, linux-kernel

Hi Jens,

Elias Oltmanns <eo@nebensachen.de> wrote:
> So, here is a patch in which your remarks and suggestions have been
> incorporated. Additionally, I've added the requested kernel doc file
> and another sysfs attribute called protect_method. The usage of this
> attribute is described in Documentation/block/disk-protection.txt.

Just forgot to mention that your suggestions haven't been implemented
yet. Thats because I'm only gradually beginning to understand the
reasoning and how it might work out in the end. It will probably take
me another weekend (or more) to come up with something fit for
discussion. Bare with me, I'm rather busy at the moment and still new
to the block layer (or kernel code, for that matter).

Regards,

Elias

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
  2006-12-10  1:16               ` Elias Oltmanns
@ 2006-12-11  8:26                 ` Jens Axboe
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2006-12-11  8:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Elias Oltmanns; +Cc: Pavel Machek, Christoph Schmid, linux-kernel

On Sun, Dec 10 2006, Elias Oltmanns wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> 
> Elias Oltmanns <eo@nebensachen.de> wrote:
> > So, here is a patch in which your remarks and suggestions have been
> > incorporated. Additionally, I've added the requested kernel doc file
> > and another sysfs attribute called protect_method. The usage of this
> > attribute is described in Documentation/block/disk-protection.txt.
> 
> Just forgot to mention that your suggestions haven't been implemented
> yet. Thats because I'm only gradually beginning to understand the
> reasoning and how it might work out in the end. It will probably take
> me another weekend (or more) to come up with something fit for
> discussion. Bare with me, I'm rather busy at the moment and still new
> to the block layer (or kernel code, for that matter).

No worries, take your time. The target for the code wont be 2.6.20
anyways, so you have at least a month to get things designed right and
solid for a 2.6.21 target.

-- 
Jens Axboe


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
  2006-12-10  1:02             ` Elias Oltmanns
  2006-12-10  1:16               ` Elias Oltmanns
@ 2007-02-04 20:41               ` Pavel Machek
  2007-02-08 10:04                 ` Elias Oltmanns
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Machek @ 2007-02-04 20:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Elias Oltmanns; +Cc: Jens Axboe, Christoph Schmid, linux-kernel

Hi1

> >> >> +module_param_named(protect_method, libata_protect_method, int, 0444);
> >> >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(protect_method, "hdaps disk protection method  (0=autodetect, 1=unload, 2=standby)");
> >> >
> >> > Should this be configurable by module parameter? Why not tell each
> >> > unload what to do?
> [...]
> >> > Is /sys interface right thing to do?
> >> 
> >> Probably, you're right here. Since this feature is actually drive
> >> specific, it should not really be set globally as a libata or ide-disk
> >> parameter but specifically for each drive connected. Perhaps we should
> >> add another attribute to /sys/block/*/queue or enhance the scope of
> >> /sys/block/*/queue/protect?
> >
> > Certainly better than current solution. Or maybe ioctl similar to wat
> > hdparm uses?
> 
> I'm not quite sure what you have in mind wrt ioctls. I'm still
> convinced that the administrator should take a conscious decision when
> forcing an idle immediate with unload feature on a drive which doesn't
> announce this capability according to the specs. This is because I
> have no idea as to how drives might react if they don't support it.
> Perhaps we should consult linux-ide on this topic.

Yep, I guess linux-ide would have some comments.

> So, here is a patch in which your remarks and suggestions have been
> incorporated. Additionally, I've added the requested kernel doc file

Additional suggestion is to keep lines < 80 columns.... Sorry it took
me so long to comment.
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
  2007-02-04 20:41               ` Pavel Machek
@ 2007-02-08 10:04                 ` Elias Oltmanns
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Elias Oltmanns @ 2007-02-08 10:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pavel Machek; +Cc: Jens Axboe, Christoph Schmid, linux-kernel

Hi Pavel,

Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
> Hi1
>
>> >> >> +module_param_named(protect_method, libata_protect_method, int, 0444);
>> >> >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(protect_method, "hdaps disk protection method  (0=autodetect, 1=unload, 2=standby)");
>> >> >
>> >> > Should this be configurable by module parameter? Why not tell each
>> >> > unload what to do?
>> [...]
>> >> > Is /sys interface right thing to do?
>> >> 
>> >> Probably, you're right here. Since this feature is actually drive
>> >> specific, it should not really be set globally as a libata or ide-disk
>> >> parameter but specifically for each drive connected. Perhaps we should
>> >> add another attribute to /sys/block/*/queue or enhance the scope of
>> >> /sys/block/*/queue/protect?
>> >
>> > Certainly better than current solution. Or maybe ioctl similar to wat
>> > hdparm uses?
>> 
>> I'm not quite sure what you have in mind wrt ioctls. I'm still
>> convinced that the administrator should take a conscious decision when
>> forcing an idle immediate with unload feature on a drive which doesn't
>> announce this capability according to the specs. This is because I
>> have no idea as to how drives might react if they don't support it.
>> Perhaps we should consult linux-ide on this topic.
>
> Yep, I guess linux-ide would have some comments.

At least, I can now see the benefits of an ioctl approach. Although
the protect_method attribute allows to configure each drive
individually, that is actually not quite what we want. Since this
attribute is meant to deal with drives that don't comply strictly with
the ATA specs, it is, at least, misleading to associate this with each
queue. Instead, it would be desirable to offer this option to ATA
drives only and to do this consistently, regardless whether the IDE or
the ATA drivers are in use. So, I'm now quite convinced that ioctls
are the easiest way to achieve just that - thanks for the hint.

>
>> So, here is a patch in which your remarks and suggestions have been
>> incorporated. Additionally, I've added the requested kernel doc file
>
> Additional suggestion is to keep lines < 80 columns.... Sorry it took
> me so long to comment.
> 								Pavel

In the meantime, I've started to implement the generic block layer
commands for queue freezing as Jens suggested in this thread.
Unfortunately, I've been very busy lately and actually I still am but
I'll try hard to get this finished rather sooner thn later.

Thanks for your support.

Elias

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
  2006-11-30 17:11     ` Pavel Machek
@ 2006-11-30 17:47       ` Shem Multinymous
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Shem Multinymous @ 2006-11-30 17:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pavel Machek; +Cc: Christoph Schmid, linux-kernel

On 11/30/06, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
> > >Does hdaps work for you, btw? It gave all zeros on my x60, iirc.
> >
> > Yes, vanilla hdaps is broken. It blindly issues commands to the
> > embedded controller without following the protocol or checking the
> > status. The patched version in the tp_smapi package fixes it.
>
> Is there a way to extract minimal patch? ...the kind that is trivial
> enough so that akpm does accepts it...?

I can't think of any such trivial fix. My submitted code includes a
whole new driver, thinkpad_ec, just to get the (fully documented!) EC
protocl right. You could strip a few code paths which hdaps doesn't
invoke, but it's hard to see how you can get away with much less
except by making unwarranted assumptions about the hardware and its
timing characteristics.

  Shem

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
  2006-11-23 18:26   ` Shem Multinymous
@ 2006-11-30 17:11     ` Pavel Machek
  2006-11-30 17:47       ` Shem Multinymous
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Machek @ 2006-11-30 17:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Shem Multinymous; +Cc: Christoph Schmid, linux-kernel

Hi!

> >Does hdaps work for you, btw? It gave all zeros on my x60, iirc.
> 
> Yes, vanilla hdaps is broken. It blindly issues commands to the
> embedded controller without following the protocol or checking the
> status. The patched version in the tp_smapi package fixes it.

Is there a way to extract minimal patch? ...the kind that is trivial
enough so that akpm does accepts it...? 
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
  2006-11-24  7:21   ` Jens Axboe
@ 2006-11-26 23:14     ` Jon Escombe
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jon Escombe @ 2006-11-26 23:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

Jens Axboe <jens.axboe <at> oracle.com> writes:

> 
> On Tue, Nov 21 2006, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi!
> > 
> > > Well, the actual question is the following,
> > > I read about HDAPS on thinkWiki. But there is no known-to-work patch for
> > > 2.6.18 and above to enable queue-freezing/harddisk parking.
> > > After some googeling and digging in gamne i read that someone said that
> > > there are plans for some generic support for HD-parking in the kernel
> > > and thus making such patches obsolete.
> > > My quesiotn just is if this is true and if there are any chances that
> > > the kernel will support that soonly.
> > ...
> > > So i hope this issue can be adressed soon. but i also know that most of
> > > you are very busy and i can not evaluate how difficult such a change
> > > would be. However if anyone wants to test some things or more
> > > information, i am ready. Just CC me :)
> > 
> > I'm afraid we need your help with development here. Porting old patch
> > to 2.6.19-rc6 should be easy, and then you can start 'how do I
> > makethis generic' debate.
> 
> 2.6.19 will finally have the generic block layer commands, so this can
> be implemented properly.
> 

That's good to know. Sounds like we'll be able to have another attempt at
getting this functionality upstream..

In the meantime, the current code has been cleaned up and updated to work with
2.6.18. Patches are on the hdaps-devel list.

http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=hdaps-devel (or gmane for an
easier view ;)

Regards,
Jon.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
  2006-11-21 20:51 ` Pavel Machek
  2006-11-23 18:26   ` Shem Multinymous
@ 2006-11-24  7:21   ` Jens Axboe
  2006-11-26 23:14     ` Jon Escombe
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2006-11-24  7:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pavel Machek; +Cc: Christoph Schmid, linux-kernel

On Tue, Nov 21 2006, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > Well, the actual question is the following,
> > I read about HDAPS on thinkWiki. But there is no known-to-work patch for
> > 2.6.18 and above to enable queue-freezing/harddisk parking.
> > After some googeling and digging in gamne i read that someone said that
> > there are plans for some generic support for HD-parking in the kernel
> > and thus making such patches obsolete.
> > My quesiotn just is if this is true and if there are any chances that
> > the kernel will support that soonly.
> ...
> > So i hope this issue can be adressed soon. but i also know that most of
> > you are very busy and i can not evaluate how difficult such a change
> > would be. However if anyone wants to test some things or more
> > information, i am ready. Just CC me :)
> 
> I'm afraid we need your help with development here. Porting old patch
> to 2.6.19-rc6 should be easy, and then you can start 'how do I
> makethis generic' debate.

2.6.19 will finally have the generic block layer commands, so this can
be implemented properly.

-- 
Jens Axboe


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
  2006-11-21 20:51 ` Pavel Machek
@ 2006-11-23 18:26   ` Shem Multinymous
  2006-11-30 17:11     ` Pavel Machek
  2006-11-24  7:21   ` Jens Axboe
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Shem Multinymous @ 2006-11-23 18:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pavel Machek; +Cc: Christoph Schmid, linux-kernel

On 11/21/06, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
> I'm afraid we need your help with development here. Porting old patch
> to 2.6.19-rc6 should be easy

http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/10/9/84
http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/10/10/275

> Does hdaps work for you, btw? It gave all zeros on my x60, iirc.

Yes, vanilla hdaps is broken. It blindly issues commands to the
embedded controller without following the protocol or checking the
status. The patched version in the tp_smapi package fixes it.

  Shem

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* Re: is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
  2006-11-17 12:47 Christoph Schmid
@ 2006-11-21 20:51 ` Pavel Machek
  2006-11-23 18:26   ` Shem Multinymous
  2006-11-24  7:21   ` Jens Axboe
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Machek @ 2006-11-21 20:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Christoph Schmid; +Cc: linux-kernel

Hi!

> Well, the actual question is the following,
> I read about HDAPS on thinkWiki. But there is no known-to-work patch for
> 2.6.18 and above to enable queue-freezing/harddisk parking.
> After some googeling and digging in gamne i read that someone said that
> there are plans for some generic support for HD-parking in the kernel
> and thus making such patches obsolete.
> My quesiotn just is if this is true and if there are any chances that
> the kernel will support that soonly.
...
> So i hope this issue can be adressed soon. but i also know that most of
> you are very busy and i can not evaluate how difficult such a change
> would be. However if anyone wants to test some things or more
> information, i am ready. Just CC me :)

I'm afraid we need your help with development here. Porting old patch
to 2.6.19-rc6 should be easy, and then you can start 'how do I
makethis generic' debate.

Does hdaps work for you, btw? It gave all zeros on my x60, iirc.
-- 
Thanks for all the (sleeping) penguins.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

* is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above?
@ 2006-11-17 12:47 Christoph Schmid
  2006-11-21 20:51 ` Pavel Machek
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Schmid @ 2006-11-17 12:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

Hello dear kernel-people,

I have a little question, which i hope is right to post here and does
not cause inconveniences.

Well, since about 6 weeks i own a Lenovo Thinkpad X60s which i bought
primarily because thinkpads are rumored to be very well supported by
linux. Sencondly because as a student i got some rebate on thinkpads ;)

Well, the actual question is the following,
I read about HDAPS on thinkWiki. But there is no known-to-work patch for
2.6.18 and above to enable queue-freezing/harddisk parking.
After some googeling and digging in gamne i read that someone said that
there are plans for some generic support for HD-parking in the kernel
and thus making such patches obsolete.
My quesiotn just is if this is true and if there are any chances that
the kernel will support that soonly.

The point is i have to trave quite some distance to my University (about
one and half an hour)
And thus doing some of my work in the train or bus. But well... they
often shake and wobble, hit the brakes suddenly and some of that stuff
which makes me nearly drop my notebook often.
Thats the most point why i would be very pleased to know that my hd
doesn't suffer a headcrash in such a circumstance.
As there are quite some notebooks out there which support this nowadays
(i know of some IBM/lenovo and HP ones), a generic support for that
would be nice and make users of linux on notebooks feel much more
comfortable.

So i hope this issue can be adressed soon. but i also know that most of
you are very busy and i can not evaluate how difficult such a change
would be. However if anyone wants to test some things or more
information, i am ready. Just CC me :)

thanks,
Christoph


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2007-02-08 10:26 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <7ibks-1fg-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found] ` <7kpjn-7th-23@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]   ` <7kDFF-8rd-29@gated-at.bofh.it>
2006-11-27 18:31     ` is there any Hard-disk shock-protection for 2.6.18 and above? Elias Oltmanns
2006-11-30 17:19       ` Pavel Machek
2006-11-30 17:51         ` Shem Multinymous
2006-12-01 14:19         ` Elias Oltmanns
2006-12-02 11:57           ` Pavel Machek
2006-12-10  1:02             ` Elias Oltmanns
2006-12-10  1:16               ` Elias Oltmanns
2006-12-11  8:26                 ` Jens Axboe
2007-02-04 20:41               ` Pavel Machek
2007-02-08 10:04                 ` Elias Oltmanns
2006-11-30 18:43       ` Jens Axboe
2006-11-17 12:47 Christoph Schmid
2006-11-21 20:51 ` Pavel Machek
2006-11-23 18:26   ` Shem Multinymous
2006-11-30 17:11     ` Pavel Machek
2006-11-30 17:47       ` Shem Multinymous
2006-11-24  7:21   ` Jens Axboe
2006-11-26 23:14     ` Jon Escombe

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).