Re: libata/ipr/powerpc: regression between 2.6.39-rc4 and 2.6.39-rc5

From: Tejun Heo
Date: Thu Jun 16 2011 - 03:51:24 EST

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 04:34:17PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > That looks like the right thing to do. For ipr's usage of
> > libata, we don't have the concept of a port frozen state, so this flag
> > should really never get set. The alternate way to fix this would be to
> > only set ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN in ata_port_alloc if ap->ops->error_handler
> > is not NULL.
> It seemed like ipr is as you say, but I wasn't sure if it was
> appropriate to make the change above in the common libata-scis code or
> not. I don't want to break some other device on accident.
> Also, I tried your suggestion, but I don't think that can happen in
> ata_port_alloc? ata_port_alloc is allocated ap itself, and it seems like
> ap->ops typically gets set only after ata_port_alloc returns?

Maybe we can test error_handler in ata_sas_port_start()?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at