[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100519070835.GG25951@kernel.dk>
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 09:08:35 +0200
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Cc: jeff@...zik.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, James.Bottomley@...e.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ben@...adent.org.uk,
davem@...emloft.net, bzolnier@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] block,libata: implement ->unlock_native_capacity()
On Wed, May 19 2010, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On 05/15/2010 08:09 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Hello, all.
> >
> > This is the evolved version of the implement-set_capacity patchset[L]
> > and contains the following patches.
> >
> > 0001-buffer-make-invalidate_bdev-drain-all-percpu-LRU-add.patch
> > 0002-block-restart-partition-scan-after-resizing-a-device.patch
> > 0003-block-ide-simplify-bdops-set_capacity-to-unlock_nati.patch
> > 0004-block-use-struct-parsed_partitions-state-universally.patch
> > 0005-block-improve-automatic-native-capacity-unlocking.patch
> > 0006-SCSI-implement-sd_unlock_native_capacity.patch
> > 0007-libata-use-the-enlarged-capacity-after-late-HPA-unlo.patch
> > 0008-libata-implement-on-demand-HPA-unlocking.patch
>
> Other than block part, everything is acked, so how do we route this?
> 0001-0005 through block tree and 0006-0008 through libata tree seem
> the easiest unless someone objects. Jens, can you please review
> 0001-0005 and take them into block tree if it seems okay?
Yeah will do.
--
Jens Axboe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists