[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH RESEND 1/2 block#for-linus] bio, fs: update READA and SWRITE to match the corresponding BIO_RW_* bits
- From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer redhat com>
- To: Tejun Heo <tj kernel org>
- Cc: Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst vlnb net>, linux-kernel vger kernel org, Bryan Mesich <bryan mesich ndsu edu>, Jens Axboe <jens axboe kernel dk>, linux-raid vger kernel org, dm-devel redhat com, scst-devel lists sourceforge net, stable kernel org
- Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH RESEND 1/2 block#for-linus] bio, fs: update READA and SWRITE to match the corresponding BIO_RW_* bits
- Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2010 14:45:33 -0400
Tejun Heo <tj kernel org> writes:
> Commit a82afdf (block: use the same failfast bits for bio and request)
> moved BIO_RW_* bits around such that they match up with REQ_* bits.
> Unfortunately, fs.h hard coded READ, WRITE, READA and SWRITE as 0, 1,
> 2 and 3, and expected them to match with BIO_RW_* bits. READ/WRITE
> didn't change but BIO_RW_AHEAD was moved to bit 4 instead of bit 1,
> breaking READA and SWRITE.
>
> This patch updates READA and SWRITE such that they match the BIO_RW_*
> bits again. A follow up patch will update the definitions to directly
> use BIO_RW_* bits so that this kind of breakage won't happen again.
>
> Stable: The offending commit a82afdf was released with v2.6.32, so
> this patch should be applied to all kernels since then but it must
> _NOT_ be applied to kernels earlier than that.
Would someone be so kind as to remind me how this problem manifests
itself? I know I read this recently, but my memory and googling skills
are both failing me. :(
Cheers,
Jeff
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]