Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-04 Thread Jens Axboe
On Fri, Feb 04 2005, Tejun Heo wrote: > Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > >On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 14:32:29 +0100, Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>On Thu, Feb 03 2005, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > >> > >>>On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 12:37:10 +0100, Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-04 Thread Jens Axboe
On Fri, Feb 04 2005, Tejun Heo wrote: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 14:32:29 +0100, Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Feb 03 2005, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 12:37:10 +0100, Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Feb 03 2005,

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-03 Thread Tejun Heo
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 14:32:29 +0100, Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Thu, Feb 03 2005, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 12:37:10 +0100, Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Thu, Feb 03 2005, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: On Wed, 2

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-03 Thread Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 11:54:48 +0900, Tejun Heo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 11_ide_drive_sleeping_fix.patch > > > > ide_drive_t.sleeping field added. 0 in sleep field used to > > indicate inactive sleeping but because 0 is a valid jiffy > > value, though slim, there's a chance

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-03 Thread Jens Axboe
On Thu, Feb 03 2005, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 12:37:10 +0100, Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 03 2005, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > > On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 11:54:48 +0900, Tejun Heo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-03 Thread Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 14:32:29 +0100, Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 03 2005, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 12:37:10 +0100, Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 03 2005, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2 Feb 2005

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-03 Thread Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 12:37:10 +0100, Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 03 2005, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 11:54:48 +0900, Tejun Heo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > 11_ide_drive_sleeping_fix.patch > > > > > > > > ide_drive_t.sleeping field

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-03 Thread Jens Axboe
On Thu, Feb 03 2005, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 11:54:48 +0900, Tejun Heo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > 11_ide_drive_sleeping_fix.patch > > > > > > ide_drive_t.sleeping field added. 0 in sleep field used to > > > indicate inactive sleeping but because 0

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-03 Thread Jens Axboe
On Thu, Feb 03 2005, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 11:54:48 +0900, Tejun Heo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 11_ide_drive_sleeping_fix.patch ide_drive_t.sleeping field added. 0 in sleep field used to indicate inactive sleeping but because 0 is a valid jiffy

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-03 Thread Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 12:37:10 +0100, Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Feb 03 2005, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 11:54:48 +0900, Tejun Heo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 11_ide_drive_sleeping_fix.patch ide_drive_t.sleeping field added. 0 in sleep

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-03 Thread Jens Axboe
On Thu, Feb 03 2005, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 12:37:10 +0100, Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Feb 03 2005, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 11:54:48 +0900, Tejun Heo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 11_ide_drive_sleeping_fix.patch

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-03 Thread Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 11:54:48 +0900, Tejun Heo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 11_ide_drive_sleeping_fix.patch ide_drive_t.sleeping field added. 0 in sleep field used to indicate inactive sleeping but because 0 is a valid jiffy value, though slim, there's a chance that

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-03 Thread Tejun Heo
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 14:32:29 +0100, Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Feb 03 2005, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 12:37:10 +0100, Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Feb 03 2005, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: On Wed, 2 Feb

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-02 Thread Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 11:54:48 +0900, Tejun Heo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 11_ide_drive_sleeping_fix.patch > > > > ide_drive_t.sleeping field added. 0 in sleep field used to > > indicate inactive sleeping but because 0 is a valid jiffy > > value, though slim, there's a chance

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-02 Thread Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 11:54:48 +0900, Tejun Heo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 11_ide_drive_sleeping_fix.patch ide_drive_t.sleeping field added. 0 in sleep field used to indicate inactive sleeping but because 0 is a valid jiffy value, though slim, there's a chance that

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-01 Thread Tejun Heo
> 11_ide_drive_sleeping_fix.patch > > ide_drive_t.sleeping field added. 0 in sleep field used to > indicate inactive sleeping but because 0 is a valid jiffy > value, though slim, there's a chance that something can go > weird. And while at it, explicit jiffy comparisons

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping

2005-02-01 Thread Tejun Heo
11_ide_drive_sleeping_fix.patch ide_drive_t.sleeping field added. 0 in sleep field used to indicate inactive sleeping but because 0 is a valid jiffy value, though slim, there's a chance that something can go weird. And while at it, explicit jiffy comparisons are