[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190629163737.GB21042@hacktheplanet>
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 12:37:37 -0400
From: Scott Bauer <sbauer@...donthack.me>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: jonathan.derrick@...el.com,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"zub@...ux.fjfi.cvut.cz" <zub@...ux.fjfi.cvut.cz>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"jonas.rabenstein@...dium.uni-erlangen.de"
<jonas.rabenstein@...dium.uni-erlangen.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] block: sed-opal: add support for shadow MBR done
flag and write
e1;5202;0csOn Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 10:35:30AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 6/29/19 10:28 AM, Scott Bauer wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 10:26:52AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >> On 6/29/19 10:19 AM, Scott Bauer wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hey Jens,
> >>>
> >>> Can you please stage these for 5.3 aswell?
> >>
> >> Yes, looks fine to me. But it conflicts with the psid revert in terms
> >> of ioctl numbering. You fine with me renumbering IOC_OPAL_MBR_DONE to:
> >>
> >> #define IOC_OPAL_MBR_DONE _IOW('p', 233, struct opal_mbr_done)
> >
> > Sorry for the conflict. That's fine. I'll fix up userland tooling.
>
> Renamed 232 -> 233, and 233 -> 234, for the two conflicts. So now we have:
>
> #define IOC_OPAL_PSID_REVERT_TPR _IOW('p', 232, struct opal_key)
> #define IOC_OPAL_MBR_DONE _IOW('p', 233, struct opal_mbr_done)
> #define IOC_OPAL_WRITE_SHADOW_MBR _IOW('p', 234, struct opal_shadow_mbr)
Looks good, thank you for handling this.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists