From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754677Ab0I3Li1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Sep 2010 07:38:27 -0400 Received: from ist.d-labs.de ([213.239.218.44]:42018 "EHLO mx01.d-labs.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754314Ab0I3Li0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Sep 2010 07:38:26 -0400 Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 13:38:23 +0200 From: Florian Mickler To: Kay Sievers Cc: Maxim Levitsky , Tejun Heo , Henrique de Moraes Holschuh , linux-kernel , Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] cdrom drive doesn't detect removal Message-ID: <20100930133823.39353d23@schatten.dmk.lab> In-Reply-To: References: <1284284969.2928.18.camel@maxim-laptop> <4C8F2699.3020509@kernel.org> <1284507516.4963.2.camel@maxim-laptop> <1284511071.3551.1.camel@maxim-laptop> <20100915132731.GA20558@khazad-dum.debian.net> <1284589207.4672.3.camel@maxim-laptop> <1285069338.3124.4.camel@maxim-laptop> <1285110590.2822.9.camel@maxim-laptop> <4C99B25D.20805@kernel.org> <1285162900.3335.15.camel@maxim-laptop> <1285163911.3159.5.camel@maxim-laptop> <4C9B141F.3050908@kernel.org> <20100930083020.62b56218@schatten.dmk.lab> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6cvs31 (GTK+ 2.20.1; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 09:48:50 +0200 Kay Sievers wrote: > > > > So, is the $subject problem solved now? Normally, we shouldn't break > > stuff with new kernels... If this is only a temporary breakage on > > the other hand, we should keep track of it... > > I ask, because this is listed as https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18522. > > If it should stay listed, we may need an ETA for the fix... > > Hmm, I still don't think that's a bug or regression. > > Optical drives are not supposed to report media changes without > constantly being polled. Why Tejun's seems to have an influence in > Maxim's setup, is likely more a timing-related issue, or some other > thing, we never really got an idea why it could change anything. > > The current behavior is the expected and correct behavior, and for me > also the older kernels behave like this. > > Kay So I'm gonna close this as invalid then. Please shout, if that's not ok. Regards, Flo