Re: [PATCH v4 4/9] ide: Mark power management requests with RQF_PM instead... | linux-block

[PATCH v4 0/9] Rework runtime suspend and SPI domain validation · Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> · 2020-11-30
[PATCH v4 1/9] block: Fix a race in the runtime power management code · Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> · 2020-11-30
[PATCH v4 3/9] ide: Do not set the RQF_PREEMPT flag for sense requests · Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> · 2020-11-30
Re: [PATCH v4 3/9] ide: Do not set the RQF_PREEMPT flag for sense requests · Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> · 2020-12-01
Re: [PATCH v4 3/9] ide: Do not set the RQF_PREEMPT flag for sense requests · Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> · 2020-12-02
[PATCH v4 2/9] block: Introduce BLK_MQ_REQ_PM · Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> · 2020-11-30
Re: [PATCH v4 2/9] block: Introduce BLK_MQ_REQ_PM · Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> · 2020-12-01
Re: [PATCH v4 2/9] block: Introduce BLK_MQ_REQ_PM · Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> · 2020-12-02
[PATCH v4 5/9] scsi: Do not wait for a request in scsi_eh_lock_door() · Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> · 2020-11-30
Re: [PATCH v4 5/9] scsi: Do not wait for a request in scsi_eh_lock_door() · Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> · 2020-12-02
Re: [PATCH v4 5/9] scsi: Do not wait for a request in scsi_eh_lock_door() · Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> · 2020-12-03
Re: [PATCH v4 5/9] scsi: Do not wait for a request in scsi_eh_lock_door() · Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> · 2020-12-03
Re: [PATCH v4 5/9] scsi: Do not wait for a request in scsi_eh_lock_door() · Ming Lei <hidden> · 2020-12-03
Re: [PATCH v4 5/9] scsi: Do not wait for a request in scsi_eh_lock_door() · Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> · 2020-12-04
[PATCH v4 6/9] scsi_transport_spi: Set RQF_PM for domain validation commands · Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> · 2020-11-30
Re: [PATCH v4 6/9] scsi_transport_spi: Set RQF_PM for domain validation commands · Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> · 2020-12-01
[PATCH v4 7/9] scsi: Only process PM requests if rpm_status != RPM_ACTIVE · Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> · 2020-11-30
Re: [PATCH v4 7/9] scsi: Only process PM requests if rpm_status != RPM_ACTIVE · Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> · 2020-12-01
Re: [PATCH v4 7/9] scsi: Only process PM requests if rpm_status != RPM_ACTIVE · Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> · 2020-12-02
[PATCH v4 8/9] block: Remove RQF_PREEMPT and BLK_MQ_REQ_PREEMPT · Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> · 2020-11-30
Re: [PATCH v4 8/9] block: Remove RQF_PREEMPT and BLK_MQ_REQ_PREEMPT · Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> · 2020-12-01
Re: [PATCH v4 8/9] block: Remove RQF_PREEMPT and BLK_MQ_REQ_PREEMPT · Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> · 2020-12-02
[PATCH v4 4/9] ide: Mark power management requests with RQF_PM instead of RQF_PREEMPT · Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> · 2020-11-30
Re: [PATCH v4 4/9] ide: Mark power management requests with RQF_PM instead of RQF_PREEMPT · Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> · 2020-12-01
Re: [PATCH v4 4/9] ide: Mark power management requests with RQF_PM instead of RQF_PREEMPT · Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> · 2020-12-02
[PATCH v4 9/9] block: Do not accept any requests while suspended · Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> · 2020-11-30
Re: [PATCH v4 9/9] block: Do not accept any requests while suspended · Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> · 2020-12-02

Re: [PATCH v4 4/9] ide: Mark power management requests with RQF_PM instead of RQF_PREEMPT

From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Date: 2020-12-01 11:32:10
Also in: linux-scsi

Looks good,

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

`h`	back out one level
`j`	next message in thread
`k`	previous message in thread
`l`	drill in
`Esc`	close help / fold thread tree
`?`	toggle this help