LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] loop: make partition scanning reliable
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:13:28 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150126161328.GA21242@htj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1422267319-8428-1-git-send-email-dh.herrmann@gmail.com>
Hello, David.
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 11:15:19AM +0100, David Herrmann wrote:
> -static int blkdev_reread_part(struct block_device *bdev)
> +int blkdev_reread_part(struct block_device *bdev, int skipbusy)
> {
> struct gendisk *disk = bdev->bd_disk;
> int res;
> @@ -159,12 +159,15 @@ static int blkdev_reread_part(struct block_device *bdev)
> return -EINVAL;
> if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> return -EACCES;
> - if (!mutex_trylock(&bdev->bd_mutex))
> + if (!skipbusy)
> + mutex_lock(&bdev->bd_mutex);
> + else if (!mutex_trylock(&bdev->bd_mutex))
> return -EBUSY;
Do we actually need the mutex_trylock() path? Why can't we just
always grab the mutex?
...
> diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
> index 6cb1beb..4047985 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/loop.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/loop.c
> @@ -637,7 +637,7 @@ out:
> * new backing store is the same size and type as the old backing store.
> */
> static int loop_change_fd(struct loop_device *lo, struct block_device *bdev,
> - unsigned int arg)
> + unsigned int arg, int *rrpart)
bool *rrpart would be better but can't we communicate this through the
return value? Wouldn't that be prettier?
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-26 16:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-26 10:15 David Herrmann
2015-01-26 16:13 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2015-01-26 17:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150126161328.GA21242@htj.dyndns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=dh.herrmann@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--subject='Re: [PATCH RFC] loop: make partition scanning reliable' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).