why disk info gets printk'ed twice?
Every dmesg users provide contains double info
about identification of [scsi,ata,..] disk drives
found in the system. Here's mine:
scsi 2:0:0:0: Direct-Access ATA ST3808110AS n/a PQ: 0 ANSI: 5
loading module sd_mod
sd 2:0:0:0: [sda] 156301488 512-byte hardware sectors (80026 MB)
sd 2:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off
sd 2:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00
sd 2:0:0:0: [sda] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA sd 2:0:0:0: [sda] 156301488 512-byte hardware sectors (80026 MB)
sd 2:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off
sd 2:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00
sd 2:0:0:0: [sda] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
sda: sda1 sda2 sda3 sda4 < sda5 sda6 sda7 >
sd 2:0:0:0: [sda] Attached SCSI disk
Why the lines beginning with "sd 2:0:0:0:" gets duplicated? Can this be fixed somehow?
All the messages are in drivers/scsi/sd_mod.c, printed out by functions called from within sd_revalidate_disk(). This routine gets called from two contexts:
sd_store_cache_type(), which is a sysfs thing, it seems, and sd_probe(), which gets called from .probe method of scsi_driver
So it seems to me that scsi_driver.probe() method gets called twice for some reason...
This question has been asked several times, but I don't recall any answers to it.
Thanks.
/mjt
From: Michael Tokarev <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 01:37:28 +0400
Quoted 5 lines
So it seems to me that
scsi_driver.probe()method gets called twice for some reason...This question has been asked several times, but I don't recall any answers to it.
I seem to remember that this happens as a side effect of how domain-validation works and that it's not easy to get rid of.
Quoted 2 lines · Michael Tokarev
This question has been asked several times, but I don't recall any answers to it.
Your google-fu is weak, padawan.
http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0508.2/0471.html
Signature · 4 lines
Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."