Re: [PATCH 03/12] libata, libsas: introduce sched_eh and end_eh port ops

[James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 2012-04-22 at 22:33 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On 04/22/2012 01:30 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-04-13 at 16:37 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> When managing shost->host_eh_scheduled libata assumes that there is a
> >> 1:1 shost-to-ata_port relationship.  libsas creates a 1:N relationship
> >> so it needs to manage host_eh_scheduled cumulatively at the host level.
> >> The sched_eh and end_eh port port ops allow libsas to track when domain
> >> devices enter/leave the "eh-pending" state under ha->lock (previously
> >> named ha->state_lock, but it is no longer just a lock for ha->state
> >> changes).
> >>
> >> Since host_eh_scheduled indicates eh without backing commands pinning
> >> the device it can be deallocated at any time.  Move the taking of the
> >> domain_device reference under the port_lock to guarantee that the
> >> ata_port stays around for the duration of eh.
> >
> >> Cc: Tejun Heo<tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Acked-by: Jacek Danecki<jacek.danecki@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Could we standardise on Acked-by, please.  In my book it means the
> > maintainer of a piece of code agrees with the change and lets me take it
> > through my tree.  I'm aware that not everyone uses this definition, so
> > we can use a different standard from my current one, but what does it
> > mean in this case?
> 
> The above, IMO, should be s/Acked-by/Signed-off-by/

Yes, I suspect this too.

> FWIW this also has
> 
> 	Acked-by: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> as noted days ago in another thread.

Understood, will add.

James


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html