* Re: [linux-lvm] typo in CVS: LVM/kernel/lvm.c
2001-05-06 9:11 ` Joe Thornber
@ 2001-05-06 12:55 ` Ed Tomlinson
2001-05-07 9:08 ` Patrick Caulfield
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ed Tomlinson @ 2001-05-06 12:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-lvm, Joe Thornber
On Sunday 06 May 2001 05:11, Joe Thornber wrote:
> On Sat, May 05, 2001 at 11:24:43PM +0200, Gergely Tamas wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > There is a typo in CVS:LVM/kernel/lvm.c
> >
> > Gergely
>
> Yes, I just looked at cvs, you're right. Thanks.
>
> Heinz & Patrick what are you playing at !?
>
> lvm.c revision 1.10
> -------------------
>
> o why did you feel the need to change the name of __update_hardblocksize ?
Cannot answer the rest of your queries, but this one I can. They did not
change the name, Alan/Linus did.
Ed Tomlinson
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [linux-lvm] typo in CVS: LVM/kernel/lvm.c
2001-05-06 9:11 ` Joe Thornber
2001-05-06 12:55 ` Ed Tomlinson
@ 2001-05-07 9:08 ` Patrick Caulfield
2001-05-07 10:34 ` Heinz J. Mauelshagen
2001-05-08 9:10 ` Patrick Caulfield
3 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Patrick Caulfield @ 2001-05-07 9:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-lvm
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 10:11:33AM +0100, Joe Thornber wrote:
>
> Patrick, you correctly fix most of the remaining mistakes apart from
> the version number. But what are all the other code changes that have
> slipped in ? They aren't mentioned in the checkin message, are they
> meant to be there ?
>
No. whatever they are - clang!
patrick
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] typo in CVS: LVM/kernel/lvm.c
2001-05-06 9:11 ` Joe Thornber
2001-05-06 12:55 ` Ed Tomlinson
2001-05-07 9:08 ` Patrick Caulfield
@ 2001-05-07 10:34 ` Heinz J. Mauelshagen
2001-05-08 9:10 ` Patrick Caulfield
3 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Heinz J. Mauelshagen @ 2001-05-07 10:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-lvm
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 10:11:33AM +0100, Joe Thornber wrote:
> On Sat, May 05, 2001 at 11:24:43PM +0200, Gergely Tamas wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > There is a typo in CVS:LVM/kernel/lvm.c
> >
> > Gergely
>
> Yes, I just looked at cvs, you're right. Thanks.
>
> Heinz & Patrick what are you playing at !?
>
> lvm.c revision 1.10
> -------------------
>
> o why did you feel the need to change the name of __update_hardblocksize ?
>
Just to adopt the new naming in > 2.4.3
> o why change the name of the max_hardblocksize variable.
Same as above.
>
> o you've duplicated ~10 lines of code instead of putting them into a seperate
> function such as:
No, just added the (wrong) version check and function call.
>
> static inline ulong _get_hard_block_size(kdev_t dev) {
> etc.
> }
I don't mind.
>
> o The code has a typo 'get_hardbsect_size' from which we can conclude that it
> was *never* compiled for a kernel < 2.4.4
Oops, my fault ;-)
>
> o The version check itself is wrong.
>
> It looks to me like a botched search and replace without subsequent
> testing, or even a cvs diff before checkin.
May be... ;-)
>
> lvm.c revision 1.11
> -------------------
>
> o typo still there, it can't have been tested.
>
> lvm.c revision 1.12
> -------------------
>
> Patrick, you correctly fix most of the remaining mistakes apart from
> the version number. But what are all the other code changes that have
> slipped in ? They aren't mentioned in the checkin message, are they
> meant to be there ?
>
> - Joe
>
>
>
> >
> > --- LVM/kernel/lvm.c.orig Thu May 3 15:37:19 2001
> > +++ LVM/kernel/lvm.c Sat May 5 23:01:22 2001
> > @@ -1879,7 +1879,7 @@
> > int max_hardsectsize = 0, hardsectsize;
> >
> > for (le = 0; le < lv->lv_allocated_le; le++) {
> > -#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE <= KERNEL_VERSION ( 2, 4, 4)
> > +#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE <= KERNEL_VERSION ( 2, 4, 3)
> > hardsectsize = get_hardblocksize(lv->lv_current_pe[le].dev);
> > #else
> > hardsectsize = get_hardsect_size(lv->lv_current_pe[le].dev);
> > @@ -1892,7 +1892,7 @@
> >
> > if (lv->lv_access & LV_SNAPSHOT) {
> > for (e = 0; e < lv->lv_remap_end; e++) {
> > -#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE <= KERNEL_VERSION ( 2, 4, 4)
> > +#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE <= KERNEL_VERSION ( 2, 4, 3)
> > hardsectsize = get_hardblocksize( lv->lv_block_exception[e].rdev_new);
> > #else
> > hardsectsize = get_hardsect_size( lv->lv_block_exception[e].rdev_new);
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-lvm mailing list
> > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
--
Regards,
Heinz -- The LVM Guy --
*** Software bugs are stupid.
Nevertheless it needs not so stupid people to solve them ***
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Heinz Mauelshagen Sistina Software Inc.
Senior Consultant/Developer Am Sonnenhang 11
56242 Marienrachdorf
Germany
Mauelshagen@Sistina.com +49 2626 141200
FAX 924446
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [linux-lvm] typo in CVS: LVM/kernel/lvm.c
2001-05-06 9:11 ` Joe Thornber
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2001-05-07 10:34 ` Heinz J. Mauelshagen
@ 2001-05-08 9:10 ` Patrick Caulfield
2001-05-08 9:43 ` Joe Thornber
2001-05-08 10:52 ` Patrick Caulfield
3 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Patrick Caulfield @ 2001-05-08 9:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-lvm
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 10:11:33AM +0100, Joe Thornber wrote:
>
> lvm.c revision 1.12
> -------------------
>
> Patrick, you correctly fix most of the remaining mistakes apart from
> the version number. But what are all the other code changes that have
> slipped in ? They aren't mentioned in the checkin message, are they
> meant to be there ?
Ah, looked at this properly now I'm "at work" again. This is the fix for the
reading of userspace pointers reported by the S/390 guy from IBM. It's not the
patch he posted but IMHO a slightly neater one.
To be quite honest it wasn't meant to go in yet (I asked on the list for him to
test it but have had no reply), that was an oversight. But now it is in it's
probably not worth removing unless we hear from anyone that it still doesn't
work on S/390. It certainly works fine on my intel (well, it would really)
and SPARC machines.
patrick
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [linux-lvm] typo in CVS: LVM/kernel/lvm.c
2001-05-08 9:10 ` Patrick Caulfield
@ 2001-05-08 9:43 ` Joe Thornber
2001-05-08 10:52 ` Patrick Caulfield
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Joe Thornber @ 2001-05-08 9:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-lvm
On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 10:10:23AM +0100, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
> On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 10:11:33AM +0100, Joe Thornber wrote:
> >
> > lvm.c revision 1.12
> > -------------------
> >
> > Patrick, you correctly fix most of the remaining mistakes apart from
> > the version number. But what are all the other code changes that have
> > slipped in ? They aren't mentioned in the checkin message, are they
> > meant to be there ?
>
> Ah, looked at this properly now I'm "at work" again. This is the fix for the
> reading of userspace pointers reported by the S/390 guy from IBM. It's not the
> patch he posted but IMHO a slightly neater one.
>
> To be quite honest it wasn't meant to go in yet (I asked on the list for him to
> test it but have had no reply), that was an oversight. But now it is in it's
> probably not worth removing unless we hear from anyone that it still doesn't
> work on S/390. It certainly works fine on my intel (well, it would really)
> and SPARC machines.
Cool, could you update the commit message then please ?
- Joe
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] typo in CVS: LVM/kernel/lvm.c
2001-05-08 9:10 ` Patrick Caulfield
2001-05-08 9:43 ` Joe Thornber
@ 2001-05-08 10:52 ` Patrick Caulfield
2001-05-08 14:38 ` Heinz J. Mauelshagen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Patrick Caulfield @ 2001-05-08 10:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-lvm
On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 10:10:23AM +0100, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
>
> To be quite honest it wasn't meant to go in yet (I asked on the list for him to
> test it but have had no reply), that was an oversight. But now it is in it's
> probably not worth removing unless we hear from anyone that it still doesn't
> work on S/390. It certainly works fine on my intel (well, it would really)
> and SPARC machines.
>
Speaking of S/390 I see you can now run S/390 Linux under emulation on Intel
Linux (IYSWIM!):
http://penguinvm.princeton.edu/hercules/index.html
Heinz, can you get me a SuSE S/390 CD set ???!
patrick
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] typo in CVS: LVM/kernel/lvm.c
2001-05-08 10:52 ` Patrick Caulfield
@ 2001-05-08 14:38 ` Heinz J. Mauelshagen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Heinz J. Mauelshagen @ 2001-05-08 14:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-lvm
On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 11:52:26AM +0100, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 10:10:23AM +0100, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
> >
> > To be quite honest it wasn't meant to go in yet (I asked on the list for him to
> > test it but have had no reply), that was an oversight. But now it is in it's
> > probably not worth removing unless we hear from anyone that it still doesn't
> > work on S/390. It certainly works fine on my intel (well, it would really)
> > and SPARC machines.
> >
>
> Speaking of S/390 I see you can now run S/390 Linux under emulation on Intel
> Linux (IYSWIM!):
>
> http://penguinvm.princeton.edu/hercules/index.html
>
> Heinz, can you get me a SuSE S/390 CD set ???!
Hang on. I'll tell you in a couple of minutes.
Heinz
>
> patrick
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread