On 12/16/2013 05:14 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 10:39 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 05:18:26PM -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Rajat Jain wrote:
Once again: the way I interpret this is: * Always enable Link events.
*
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 10:39 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 05:18:26PM -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Rajat Jain wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > >> Once again: the way I interpret this is: * Always enable Link events.
>> >> > >> * Disable presence
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 05:18:26PM -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Rajat Jain wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> Once again: the way I interpret this is: * Always enable Link events.
> >> > >> * Disable presence events if attention button is present.
> >> > >
> >> > > That
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 05:18:26PM -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Rajat Jain rajatj...@juniper.net wrote:
Once again: the way I interpret this is: * Always enable Link events.
* Disable presence events if attention button is present.
That sounds
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 10:39 AM, Guenter Roeck li...@roeck-us.net wrote:
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 05:18:26PM -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Rajat Jain rajatj...@juniper.net wrote:
Once again: the way I interpret this is: * Always enable Link events.
*
On 12/16/2013 05:14 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 10:39 AM, Guenter Roeck li...@roeck-us.net wrote:
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 05:18:26PM -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Rajat Jain rajatj...@juniper.net wrote:
Once again: the way I interpret this
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Rajat Jain wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Once again: the way I interpret this is:
>> > >> * Always enable Link events.
>> > >> * Disable presence events if attention button is present.
>> > >
>> > > That sounds like a good plan to me.
>> >
>> > How about Diag_Reset from
> > >
> > >> Once again: the way I interpret this is:
> > >> * Always enable Link events.
> > >> * Disable presence events if attention button is present.
> > >
> > > That sounds like a good plan to me.
> >
> > How about Diag_Reset from MPT2SAS and others?
> > link could up and down
> >
I am
Hello,
> -Original Message-
> From: Bjorn Helgaas [mailto:bhelg...@google.com]
>
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Rajat Jain
> wrote:
> >> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:26 PM, Yinghai Lu
> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Bjorn Helgaas
> >> >
>
> > Also, I think the
Hello,
-Original Message-
From: Bjorn Helgaas [mailto:bhelg...@google.com]
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Rajat Jain rajatj...@juniper.net
wrote:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:26 PM, Yinghai Lu ying...@kernel.org
wrote:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Bjorn Helgaas
Once again: the way I interpret this is:
* Always enable Link events.
* Disable presence events if attention button is present.
That sounds like a good plan to me.
How about Diag_Reset from MPT2SAS and others?
link could up and down
I am assuming you are referring to
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Rajat Jain rajatj...@juniper.net wrote:
Once again: the way I interpret this is:
* Always enable Link events.
* Disable presence events if attention button is present.
That sounds like a good plan to me.
How about Diag_Reset from MPT2SAS and
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 05:58:08PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Rajat Jain wrote:
> >
> >> Once again: the way I interpret this is:
> >> * Always enable Link events.
> >> * Disable presence events if
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Rajat Jain wrote:
>
>> Once again: the way I interpret this is:
>> * Always enable Link events.
>> * Disable presence events if attention button is present.
>
> That sounds like a good plan to me.
How
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Rajat Jain wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:26 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Bjorn Helgaas
> Also, I think the device removal should _always_ be initiated (if not done
> already) whenever the Link goes down for any reason
Hello folks,
Firstly, thanks a lot for taking a look at my patch set.
>
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:26 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Bjorn Helgaas
> wrote:
>
> >>> * Define and use interrupt events for linkup / linkdown.
> >>
> >> This seems like a reasonable
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:26 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>> * Define and use interrupt events for linkup / linkdown.
>>
>> This seems like a reasonable idea.
>>
>> In the ExpressCard Standard (Rel 2.0, Feb 2009), Section 6.3.1 and Figure
>>
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:26 PM, Yinghai Lu ying...@kernel.org wrote:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Bjorn Helgaas bhelg...@google.com wrote:
* Define and use interrupt events for linkup / linkdown.
This seems like a reasonable idea.
In the ExpressCard Standard (Rel 2.0, Feb 2009),
Hello folks,
Firstly, thanks a lot for taking a look at my patch set.
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:26 PM, Yinghai Lu ying...@kernel.org wrote:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Bjorn Helgaas bhelg...@google.com
wrote:
* Define and use interrupt events for linkup / linkdown.
This seems
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Rajat Jain rajatj...@juniper.net wrote:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:26 PM, Yinghai Lu ying...@kernel.org wrote:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Bjorn Helgaas bhelg...@google.com
Also, I think the device removal should _always_ be initiated (if not done
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Bjorn Helgaas bhelg...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Rajat Jain rajatj...@juniper.net wrote:
Once again: the way I interpret this is:
* Always enable Link events.
* Disable presence events if attention button is present.
That sounds
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 05:58:08PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Bjorn Helgaas bhelg...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Rajat Jain rajatj...@juniper.net wrote:
Once again: the way I interpret this is:
* Always enable Link events.
* Disable
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> [+cc Yinghai]
>
> On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 02:32:46PM -0800, Rajat Jain wrote:
>> A lot of systems do not have the fancy buttons and LEDs, and instead
>> want to rely only on the Link state change events to drive the hotplug
>> and removal
[+cc Yinghai]
On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 02:32:46PM -0800, Rajat Jain wrote:
> A lot of systems do not have the fancy buttons and LEDs, and instead
> want to rely only on the Link state change events to drive the hotplug
> and removal state machinery.
>
[+cc Yinghai]
On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 02:32:46PM -0800, Rajat Jain wrote:
A lot of systems do not have the fancy buttons and LEDs, and instead
want to rely only on the Link state change events to drive the hotplug
and removal state machinery.
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Bjorn Helgaas bhelg...@google.com wrote:
[+cc Yinghai]
On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 02:32:46PM -0800, Rajat Jain wrote:
A lot of systems do not have the fancy buttons and LEDs, and instead
want to rely only on the Link state change events to drive the hotplug
and
On 12/05/2013 01:07 AM, Yijing Wang wrote:
>
> handle_link_up_event() and handle_link_down_event() are almost the same,
> what about use like:
> handle_link_state_change_event(p_slot, event) to reuse the the common code ?
>
>
Sure, I can combine both of them to make it look more like this. Let
On 2013/12/4 6:32, Rajat Jain wrote:
> A lot of systems do not have the fancy buttons and LEDs, and instead
> want to rely only on the Link state change events to drive the hotplug
> and removal state machinery.
> (http://www.spinics.net/lists/hotplug/msg05802.html)
>
> This patch adds support
On 2013/12/4 6:32, Rajat Jain wrote:
A lot of systems do not have the fancy buttons and LEDs, and instead
want to rely only on the Link state change events to drive the hotplug
and removal state machinery.
(http://www.spinics.net/lists/hotplug/msg05802.html)
This patch adds support for that
On 12/05/2013 01:07 AM, Yijing Wang wrote:
handle_link_up_event() and handle_link_down_event() are almost the same,
what about use like:
handle_link_state_change_event(p_slot, event) to reuse the the common code ?
Sure, I can combine both of them to make it look more like this. Let me
A lot of systems do not have the fancy buttons and LEDs, and instead
want to rely only on the Link state change events to drive the hotplug
and removal state machinery.
(http://www.spinics.net/lists/hotplug/msg05802.html)
This patch adds support for that functionality. Here are the details
about
A lot of systems do not have the fancy buttons and LEDs, and instead
want to rely only on the Link state change events to drive the hotplug
and removal state machinery.
(http://www.spinics.net/lists/hotplug/msg05802.html)
This patch adds support for that functionality. Here are the details
about
32 matches
Mail list logo
