I wonder how many drives we've SMART-killed over this through the time it's been this way.
-- Cryo:William J. Coldwell ARIN:WC25/AS7769 PGP:0xF97CC215/0x5E9944455 Warped, Inc. warped.com Founder/CTO 661-WARPED1 @warped @deadjournal NetBSD netbsd.org/pkgsrc.org President,Project Security,Social Media "Put on 3D glasses, otherwise you only see in 1½D.” [self opinion]; > On Jun 17, 2016, at 16:33, Anindya Mukherjee <[email protected]> wrote: > > I submitted a new PR: #51252 > >> Doing the poweroff in wdlastclose() is bad because then you'll have a >> poweroff/powerup cycle for a reboot, or even on unmount/mount events if this >> is not your root device. This can be harmful for some disks (this has already >> been discussed). > > Yes, I can confirm this is a problem; cannot have an unconditional > wd_standby() call in wdlastclose() after flushing. The idea of wrapping the > reboot state in a flag and checking it sounds good. > > I didn't yet have a chance to try the last patch. > >> I'd prefer to have it the other way round then: a DETACH_POWEROFF >> which is set only for halt -p. > > Yes that would be ideal.
