Re: [patch 7/7] uml ubd: handle readonly status

From: Blaisorblade (blaisorblade_at_yahoo.it)
Date: 04/25/05

  • Next message: Evgeniy Polyakov: "Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/22] W1: sysfs, lifetime and other fixes" 
    To: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
Date:	Mon, 25 Apr 2005 21:20:15 +0200

    On Monday 25 April 2005 12:16, Jens Axboe wrote:
    > On Sun, Apr 24 2005, blaisorblade@yahoo.it wrote:
    > > @@ -1099,6 +1104,7 @@ static int prepare_request(struct reques
    > > if((rq_data_dir(req) == WRITE) && !dev->openflags.w){
    > > printk("Write attempted on readonly ubd device %s\n",
    > > disk->disk_name);
    > > + WARN_ON(1); /* This should be impossible now */
    > > end_request(req, 0);
    > > return(1);
    > > }
    >
    > I don't think that's a sound change. The WARN_ON() is strictly only
    > really useful for when you need the stack trace for something
    > interesting. As the io happens async, you will get a boring trace that
    > doesn't contain any valuable information.
    Ok, removed, and resending the patch, is the rest ok? I.e. is that supposed to
    work? I gave a walk around and it seemed that the code handles
    set_{disk,device}_ro() even during the open, but I'm no block layer expert.

    Thanks for the review. 

    -- 
Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade
Skype user "PaoloGiarrusso"
Linux registered user n. 292729
http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
  • Next message: Evgeniy Polyakov: "Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/22] W1: sysfs, lifetime and other fixes"

    Relevant Pages