[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.11.1611291246140.1914@mail.ewheeler.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 12:49:16 -0800 (PST)
From: Eric Wheeler <bcache@...ts.ewheeler.net>
To: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@...wei.com>
cc: axboe@...com, kent.overstreet@...il.com, git@...ux.ewheeler.net,
colyli@...e.de, linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] bcache: Remove redundant set_capacity
On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Yijing Wang wrote:
> set_capacity() has been called in bcache_device_init(),
> remove the redundant one.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@...wei.com>
> ---
> drivers/md/bcache/super.c | 3 ---
> 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/super.c b/drivers/md/bcache/super.c
> index 849ad44..b638a16 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/bcache/super.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/bcache/super.c
> @@ -1126,9 +1126,6 @@ static int cached_dev_init(struct cached_dev *dc, unsigned block_size)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - set_capacity(dc->disk.disk,
> - dc->bdev->bd_part->nr_sects - dc->sb.data_offset);
> -
It probably is a duplicate set_capacity, but has anyone tested bringing on
a writeback volume, and late-attaching the cache volume with this patch
applied?
Otherwise stated, is it possible to get the backing device attached
without setting the capacity?
-Eric
> dc->disk.disk->queue->backing_dev_info.ra_pages =
> max(dc->disk.disk->queue->backing_dev_info.ra_pages,
> q->backing_dev_info.ra_pages);
> --
> 2.5.0
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bcache" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists