[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACVXFVPDjY2VAkRLYrvdfnhh6qiMb8iSNJxu_1RJTX2i=YH0NQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 09:06:16 +0800
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
To: Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>
Cc: Sebastian Ott <sebott@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
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>,
Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, Stefan Weinhuber <wein@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 7/7] s390/block/dasd: remove obsolete while -EBUSY loop
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 2:00 AM, Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 07:32:24PM +0200, Sebastian Ott wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Apr 2015, Ming Lei wrote:
>> > From: Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>
>> >
>> > With the mutex_trylock bit gone from blkdev_reread_part(), the retry logic
>> > in dasd_scan_partitions() shouldn't be necessary.
>> >
>> > CC: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
>> > CC: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
>> > CC: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
>> > CC: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
>> > CC: Markus Pargmann <mpa@...gutronix.de>
>> > CC: Stefan Weinhuber <wein@...ibm.com>
>> > CC: Stefan Haberland <stefan.haberland@...ibm.com>
>> > CC: Sebastian Ott <sebott@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> > CC: Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>
>> > CC: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
>> > CC: David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>
>> > CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
>> > CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
>> > CC: nbd-general@...ts.sourceforge.net
>> > CC: linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
>> > Signed-off-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>
>> > ---
>> > drivers/s390/block/dasd_genhd.c | 13 +++----------
>> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/s390/block/dasd_genhd.c b/drivers/s390/block/dasd_genhd.c
>> > index 2af4619..189ea2f 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/s390/block/dasd_genhd.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/s390/block/dasd_genhd.c
>> > @@ -99,9 +99,8 @@ void dasd_gendisk_free(struct dasd_block *block)
>> > int dasd_scan_partitions(struct dasd_block *block)
>> > {
>> > struct block_device *bdev;
>> > - int retry, rc;
>> > + int rc;
>> >
>> > - retry = 5;
>> > bdev = bdget_disk(block->gdp, 0);
>> > if (!bdev) {
>> > DBF_DEV_EVENT(DBF_ERR, block->base, "%s",
>> > @@ -118,14 +117,8 @@ int dasd_scan_partitions(struct dasd_block *block)
>> > }
>> >
>> > rc = blkdev_reread_part(bdev);
>> > - while (rc == -EBUSY && retry > 0) {
>> > - schedule();
>> > - rc = blkdev_reread_part(bdev);
>> > - retry--;
>> > - DBF_DEV_EVENT(DBF_ERR, block->base,
>> > - "scan partitions error, retry %d rc %d",
>> > - retry, rc);
>> > - }
>> > + DBF_DEV_EVENT(DBF_ERR, block->base,
>> > + "scan partitions error, rc %d", rc);
>>
>> Could you please change that to only write the debug message in the error
>> case. Other than that, both dasd patches look good.
>
> D'oh, absolutely. Ming, do you want me to send an updated patch 7 along in
> reply here, or do you want to handle it and/or repost the entire set?
I will handle that, and will add your guys' acked-by and tested-by too,
but need to take a while for looking if there are further comments.
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