10.09.2014 12:58, Tom Gundersen пишет:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Alexander E. Patrakov
<patra...@gmail.com> wrote:
10.09.2014 12:46, Tom Gundersen пишет:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
<mcg...@do-not-panic.com> wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 12:35 PM, James Bottomley
<james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com> wrote:
On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 12:16 -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 10:38 PM, James Bottomley
<james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com> wrote:
If we want to sort out some sync/async mechanism for probing devices,
as
an agreement between the init systems and the kernel, that's fine, but
its a to-be negotiated enhancement.
Unfortunately as Tejun notes the train has left which already made
assumptions on this.
Well, that's why it's a bug. It's a material regression impacting
users.
Indeed. I believe the issue with this regression however was that the
original commit e64fae55 (January 2012) was only accepted by *kernel
folks* to be a real regression until recently.
Just for the record, this only caused user-visible problems after
kernel commit 786235ee (November 2013), right?
No. The pata-marvell (or rather libata in general) problem existed before
that.
Thanks. I have missed that. Link?
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=59581
--
Alexander E. Patrakov
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
