Re: [ACPI] PATCH-ACPI based CPU hotplug[2/6]-ACPI Eject interface support

From: Keshavamurthy Anil S <anil.s.keshavamurthy_at_intel.com>
Date: 2004-09-22 07:51:50
On Tue, Sep 21, 2004 at 12:51:36AM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Monday 20 September 2004 08:38 pm, Keshavamurthy Anil S wrote:
> > Currently I am handling both the surprise removal and the eject request in the same
> > way, i,e send the notification to the userland and the usermode agent scripts
> > is responsible for offlining of all the devices and then echoing onto eject file.
> > 
> 
> I actually think that on the highest level we should treat controlled and
> surprise ejects differently. With controlled ejects the system (kernel +
> userspace) can abort the sequence if something goes wrong while with surprise
> eject the device is physically gone. Even if driver refuses to detach or we
> have partition still mounted or something else if physical device is gone we
> don't have any choice except for trimming the tree and doing whatever we need
> to do.

I agree, but when dealing with devices like CPU and Memory, not sure how the
rest of the Operating System handles surprise removal. For now I will go ahead and
add a PRINTK saying that BUS_CHECK(surprise removal request) was received in the 
ACPI Processor and in the container driver, and when we hit that printk on a 
real hardware, I believe it would be the right time then to see how the OS behaves 
and do the right code then. For Now I will just go ahead and add a PRINTK.

Let me know if this step by step approach is okay to you.

thanks,
Anil

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Tue Sep 21 17:52:24 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:30 EST