On Tuesday, February 05, 2013 10:39:48 AM Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 12:11:17PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, February 04, 2013 04:04:47 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 12:52:30AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > You'd probably never try to hot-
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 12:11:17PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, February 04, 2013 04:04:47 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 12:52:30AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > You'd probably never try to hot-remove a disk before unmounting
> > > filesystems
> > > mounted
On Monday, February 04, 2013 04:04:47 PM Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 12:52:30AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > You'd probably never try to hot-remove a disk before unmounting filesystems
> > mounted from it or failing it as a RAID component and nobody sane wants the
> > kernel to
On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 00:52 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, February 04, 2013 03:13:29 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 21:07 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Monday, February 04, 2013 06:33:52 AM Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 03:21:22PM +0100, Ra
On Monday, February 04, 2013 04:04:47 PM Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 12:52:30AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > You'd probably never try to hot-remove a disk before unmounting filesystems
> > mounted from it or failing it as a RAID component and nobody sane wants the
> > kernel to
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 12:52:30AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> You'd probably never try to hot-remove a disk before unmounting filesystems
> mounted from it or failing it as a RAID component and nobody sane wants the
> kernel to do things like that automatically when the user presses the ejec
On Monday, February 04, 2013 03:13:29 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 21:07 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, February 04, 2013 06:33:52 AM Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 03:21:22PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Monday, February 04, 2013 04:48:10
On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 00:23 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, February 04, 2013 01:59:27 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 20:45 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Monday, February 04, 2013 09:46:18 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 04:46 -0800, Greg K
On Monday, February 04, 2013 01:59:27 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 20:45 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, February 04, 2013 09:46:18 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 04:46 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 05:28:09PM -0700, Toshi Kan
On Monday, February 04, 2013 01:34:18 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 21:12 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, February 04, 2013 12:46:24 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 20:48 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Monday, February 04, 2013 09:02:46 AM
On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 21:07 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, February 04, 2013 06:33:52 AM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 03:21:22PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Monday, February 04, 2013 04:48:10 AM Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 09:44:39PM +0100
On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 20:45 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, February 04, 2013 09:46:18 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 04:46 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 05:28:09PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 2013-02-02 at 16:01 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 21:12 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, February 04, 2013 12:46:24 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 20:48 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Monday, February 04, 2013 09:02:46 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 14:41 +0100, Rafael
On Monday, February 04, 2013 12:46:24 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 20:48 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, February 04, 2013 09:02:46 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 14:41 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, February 03, 2013 07:23:49 PM
On Monday, February 04, 2013 06:33:52 AM Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 03:21:22PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, February 04, 2013 04:48:10 AM Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 09:44:39PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > Yes, but those are just remove
On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 20:48 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, February 04, 2013 09:02:46 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 14:41 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Sunday, February 03, 2013 07:23:49 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 09:15:37PM +0100, Ra
On Monday, February 04, 2013 09:02:46 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 14:41 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Sunday, February 03, 2013 07:23:49 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 09:15:37PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, February 02, 2013 03:58:
On Monday, February 04, 2013 09:46:18 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 04:46 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 05:28:09PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2013-02-02 at 16:01 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 01:40:10PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
On Monday, February 04, 2013 09:19:09 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 15:21 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, February 04, 2013 04:48:10 AM Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 09:44:39PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > Yes, but those are just remove even
On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 04:46 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 05:28:09PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Sat, 2013-02-02 at 16:01 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 01:40:10PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2013-02-01 at 07:30 +, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > >
On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 15:21 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, February 04, 2013 04:48:10 AM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 09:44:39PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > Yes, but those are just remove events and we can only see how
> > > > destructive they
> > > > were a
On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 14:41 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Sunday, February 03, 2013 07:23:49 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 09:15:37PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Saturday, February 02, 2013 03:58:01 PM Greg KH wrote:
:
> > > Yes, but those are just remove event
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 03:21:22PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, February 04, 2013 04:48:10 AM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 09:44:39PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > Yes, but those are just remove events and we can only see how
> > > > destructive they
> > > >
On Monday, February 04, 2013 04:48:10 AM Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 09:44:39PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > Yes, but those are just remove events and we can only see how destructive
> > > they
> > > were after the removal. The point is to be able to figure out whether or
>
On Sunday, February 03, 2013 07:23:49 PM Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 09:15:37PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Saturday, February 02, 2013 03:58:01 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 11:12:59PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Friday, February 01, 2013 08
On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 09:44:39PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Yes, but those are just remove events and we can only see how destructive
> > they
> > were after the removal. The point is to be able to figure out whether or
> > not
> > we *want* to do the removal in the first place.
> >
On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 05:28:09PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-02-02 at 16:01 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 01:40:10PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2013-02-01 at 07:30 +, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 06:32:18PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
On Sunday, February 03, 2013 07:24:47 PM Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 11:18:20PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Saturday, February 02, 2013 09:15:37 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Saturday, February 02, 2013 03:58:01 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > [...]
> > >
> > > > I know it's m
On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 09:15:37PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, February 02, 2013 03:58:01 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 11:12:59PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Friday, February 01, 2013 08:23:12 AM Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 09:54:5
On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 11:18:20PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, February 02, 2013 09:15:37 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Saturday, February 02, 2013 03:58:01 PM Greg KH wrote:
> [...]
> >
> > > I know it's more complicated with these types of devices, and I think we
> > > ar
On Sat, 2013-02-02 at 16:01 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 01:40:10PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-02-01 at 07:30 +, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 06:32:18PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > > This is already done for PCI host bridges and platform dev
On Saturday, February 02, 2013 09:15:37 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, February 02, 2013 03:58:01 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 11:12:59PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Friday, February 01, 2013 08:23:12 AM Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 09:54:
On Saturday, February 02, 2013 09:15:37 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, February 02, 2013 03:58:01 PM Greg KH wrote:
[...]
>
> > I know it's more complicated with these types of devices, and I think we
> > are getting closer to the correct solution, I just don't want to ever
> > see dup
On Saturday, February 02, 2013 03:58:01 PM Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 11:12:59PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Friday, February 01, 2013 08:23:12 AM Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 09:54:51PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > > But, again, I'm going to as
On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 01:40:10PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-02-01 at 07:30 +, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 06:32:18PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > This is already done for PCI host bridges and platform devices and I
> > don't
> > > > see why we can't do that for
On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 11:12:59PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, February 01, 2013 08:23:12 AM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 09:54:51PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > But, again, I'm going to ask why you aren't using the existing cpu /
> > > > > memory / bridg
On Fri, 2013-02-01 at 23:21 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, February 01, 2013 01:40:10 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-02-01 at 07:30 +, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 06:32:18PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > > This is already done for PCI host bridges and pla
On Friday, February 01, 2013 01:40:10 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-02-01 at 07:30 +, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 06:32:18PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > This is already done for PCI host bridges and platform devices and I
> > don't
> > > > see why we can't do that for
On Friday, February 01, 2013 08:23:12 AM Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 09:54:51PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > But, again, I'm going to ask why you aren't using the existing cpu /
> > > > memory / bridge / node devices that we have in the kernel. Please use
> > > > them, or g
On Fri, 2013-02-01 at 07:30 +, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 06:32:18PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > This is already done for PCI host bridges and platform devices and I don't
> > > see why we can't do that for the other types of devices too.
> > >
> > > The only missing piece I se
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 06:32:18PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> This is already done for PCI host bridges and platform devices and I don't
> > see why we can't do that for the other types of devices too.
> >
> > The only missing piece I see is a way to handle the "eject" problem, i.e.
> > when we t
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 09:54:51PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > But, again, I'm going to ask why you aren't using the existing cpu /
> > > memory / bridge / node devices that we have in the kernel. Please use
> > > them, or give me a _really_ good reason why they will not work.
> >
> > W
On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 21:54 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 07:57:45 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 23:58 -0500, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 04:40:19PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
:
> > > > +};
> > > > +
> > > > +struct shp_device {
>
On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 07:57:45 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 23:58 -0500, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 04:40:19PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > +/*
> > > + * Hot-plug device information
> > > + */
> >
> > Again, stop it with the "generic" hotplug term here, a
On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 05:24 +, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 06:15:12PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > Please make it a "real" pointer, and not a void *, those shouldn't be
> > > used at all if possible.
> >
> > How about changing the "void *handle" to acpi_dev_node below?
> >
>
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 06:15:12PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > Please make it a "real" pointer, and not a void *, those shouldn't be
> > used at all if possible.
>
> How about changing the "void *handle" to acpi_dev_node below?
>
>struct acpi_dev_nodeacpi_node;
>
> Basically, it has
On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 23:58 -0500, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 04:40:19PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * Hot-plug device information
> > + */
>
> Again, stop it with the "generic" hotplug term here, and everywhere
> else. You are doing a very _specific_ type of hotplug devi
On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 23:53 -0500, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 04:40:19PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > Added include/linux/sys_hotplug.h, which defines the system device
> > hotplug framework interfaces used by the framework itself and
> > handlers.
> >
> > The order values define the
On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 23:48 -0500, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 12:02:04PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Mon, 2013-01-14 at 19:48 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Monday, January 14, 2013 08:33:48 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2013-01-11 at 22:23 +0100, Rafael J. Wysock
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 04:40:19PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> +/*
> + * Hot-plug device information
> + */
Again, stop it with the "generic" hotplug term here, and everywhere
else. You are doing a very _specific_ type of hotplug devices, so spell
it out. We've worked hard to hotplug _everything_
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 04:40:19PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> Added include/linux/sys_hotplug.h, which defines the system device
> hotplug framework interfaces used by the framework itself and
> handlers.
>
> The order values define the calling sequence of handlers. For add
> execute, the orderin
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 12:02:04PM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-01-14 at 19:48 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, January 14, 2013 08:33:48 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2013-01-11 at 22:23 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, January 10, 2013 04:40:19 PM
On Mon, 2013-01-14 at 19:48 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, January 14, 2013 08:33:48 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-01-11 at 22:23 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Thursday, January 10, 2013 04:40:19 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > > Added include/linux/sys_hotplug.h, which
On Monday, January 14, 2013 08:33:48 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-01-11 at 22:23 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday, January 10, 2013 04:40:19 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > Added include/linux/sys_hotplug.h, which defines the system device
> > > hotplug framework interfaces used by
On Fri, 2013-01-11 at 22:23 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, January 10, 2013 04:40:19 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > Added include/linux/sys_hotplug.h, which defines the system device
> > hotplug framework interfaces used by the framework itself and
> > handlers.
> >
> > The order values
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 04:40:19 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> Added include/linux/sys_hotplug.h, which defines the system device
> hotplug framework interfaces used by the framework itself and
> handlers.
>
> The order values define the calling sequence of handlers. For add
> execute, the orderin
Added include/linux/sys_hotplug.h, which defines the system device
hotplug framework interfaces used by the framework itself and
handlers.
The order values define the calling sequence of handlers. For add
execute, the ordering is ACPI->MEM->CPU. Memory is onlined before
CPU so that threads on ne
57 matches
Mail list logo
