[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200108150428.GB10975@lst.de>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 16:04:28 +0100
From: "hch@....de" <hch@....de>
To: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Cc: "Singh, Balbir" <sblbir@...zon.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"Sangaraju, Someswarudu" <ssomesh@...zon.com>,
"jejb@...ux.ibm.com" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
"hch@....de" <hch@....de>, "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"mst@...hat.com" <mst@...hat.com>,
"linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
"Chaitanya.Kulkarni@....com" <Chaitanya.Kulkarni@....com>
Subject: Re: [resend v1 1/5] block/genhd: Notify udev about capacity change
On Tue, Jan 07, 2020 at 10:15:34PM -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>
> Balbir,
>
> > I did this to avoid having to enforce that set_capacity() implied a
> > notification. Largely to control the impact of the change by default.
>
> What I thought. I'm OK with set_capacity_and_notify(), btw.
To some extent it might make sense to always notify from set_capacity
and have a set_capacity_nonotify if we don't want to notify, as in
general we probably should notify unless we have a good reason not to.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists