[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACVXFVO6Snp2FtnSXJNfcXNg2T81gHGy8TwfVCJ4MRqQvYO7sA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 08:47:33 +0800
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
To: Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>,
Markus Pargmann <mpa@...gutronix.de>,
"nbd-general@...ts.sourceforge.net"
<nbd-general@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
Stefan Haberland <stefan.haberland@...ibm.com>,
Sebastian Ott <sebott@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] block: dasd_genhd: convert to blkdev_reread_part
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 9:46 PM, Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 05, 2015 at 03:24:47PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> Also remove the obsolete comment.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/s390/block/dasd_genhd.c | 9 +++------
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/s390/block/dasd_genhd.c b/drivers/s390/block/dasd_genhd.c
>> index 90f39f7..2af4619 100644
>> --- a/drivers/s390/block/dasd_genhd.c
>> +++ b/drivers/s390/block/dasd_genhd.c
>> @@ -116,14 +116,11 @@ int dasd_scan_partitions(struct dasd_block *block)
>> rc);
>> return -ENODEV;
>> }
>> - /*
>> - * See fs/partition/check.c:register_disk,rescan_partitions
>> - * Can't call rescan_partitions directly. Use ioctl.
>> - */
>> - rc = ioctl_by_bdev(bdev, BLKRRPART, 0);
>> +
>> + rc = blkdev_reread_part(bdev);
>> while (rc == -EBUSY && retry > 0) {
>> schedule();
>> - rc = ioctl_by_bdev(bdev, BLKRRPART, 0);
>> + rc = blkdev_reread_part(bdev);
>> retry--;
>> DBF_DEV_EVENT(DBF_ERR, block->base,
>> "scan partitions error, retry %d rc %d",
>
> Note: patch 6/6 in the series makes this whole while() loops pointless,
> since the possibility of the -EBUSY return goes away.
Yes, I do see that, and the while() can be removed after this patchset
is merged.
Thanks,
Ming Lei
--
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