[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160529064728.GA14383@infradead.org>
Date: Sat, 28 May 2016 23:47:28 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Shaohua Li <shli@...com>
Cc: linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
sitsofe@...oo.com, snitzer@...hat.com, axboe@...com,
martin.petersen@...cle.com, Kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: correctly fallback for zeroout
On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 11:08:14AM -0700, Shaohua Li wrote:
> -int blkdev_issue_discard(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t sector,
> - sector_t nr_sects, gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned long flags)
> +static int do_blkdev_issue_discard(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t sector,
We've split blkdev_issue_discard into __blkdev_issue_discard and a small
wrapper around in for 4.7, so this will need a bit of an update.
As part of that I also removed the strange EOPNOTSUPP ignore, but Mike
reverted it just because it changed something in the dm testsuite.
I still believe we should never ignore it in this helper, and only
do so in callers that believe it's the right thing.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists