Re: [PATCH] mmc: Multi-sector writes

From: Russell King (rmk+lkml_at_arm.linux.org.uk)
Date: 08/18/05

  • Next message: Greg KH: "Re: [PATCH] add transport class symlink to device object"
    Date:	Thu, 18 Aug 2005 07:38:24 +0100
    To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
    
    

    On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 10:48:05PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > Pierre Ossman <drzeus-list@drzeus.cx> wrote:
    > >
    > > >I'm thinking that it would be better to not have the config option there
    > > >and then re-add it late in the 2.6.14 cycle if someone reports problems
    > > >which cannot be fixed. Or at least make it default to 'y' so we get more
    > > >testing coverage, then remove the config option later. Or something.
    > > >
    > > >Thoughts?
    > > >
    > > >
    > >
    > > Removing it would be preferable by me. All that #ifdef tends to clutter
    > > up the code. After som initial problem with a buggy card everything has
    > > worked flawlesly.
    >
    > OK.. Please send an additional patch for that sometime?

    I'd rather not. The problem is that we have a host (thanks Intel)
    which is unable to report how many bytes were transferred before an
    error occurs. My fear is that doing anything other than sector by
    sector write will lead to corruption should an error occur.

    However, I've no way to induce such an error, so I can only base
    this on theory.

    It may work perfectly for the case when everything's operating
    correctly, but I suspect if you're going to do multi-sector writes,
    it'll all fall apart on the first error, especially on this host.

    -- 
    Russell King
     Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
     maintainer of:  2.6 Serial core
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
    

  • Next message: Greg KH: "Re: [PATCH] add transport class symlink to device object"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: 2.6.3 adaptec I2O will not compile
      ... >the new kernel yet, I expect to do that shortly and will report any ... Somebody just mailed me a patch too, but I found the following discrepancy: ... This is used to release the host, now read the comment, and then the ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: [2.6.14-rc1] sym scsi boot hang
      ... it's probably a double down of the host scan ... the queue a request with REQ_DONTPREP set. ... Here is a patch that addresses the first problem and fixes up a few other ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: [PATCH] mmc: Multi-sector writes
      ... The problem is that we have a host ... >sector write will lead to corruption should an error occur. ... >it'll all fall apart on the first error, ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: 2.6.11.8 + UML/x86_64 (2.6.12-rc3+) = oops
      ... > mconsole-exec, if it's the patch I'm thinking of, is a patch to the UML ... The host is running 2.6.11.8 - no extra patches at all. ... Strange thing is, they had names up to the point where I got the ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: [PATCH] loop: fixing cryptoloop troubles.
      ... encryption sector by sector (not bvec by bvec) since every sector can ... Should I repost the patch with an additional ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)