From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: dm-devel@redhat.com,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>,
"Hawrylewicz Czarnowski,
Przemyslaw" <przemyslaw.hawrylewicz.czarnowski@intel.com>
Subject: Re: HPA unlock during partition scan of RAID components
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 14:08:10 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111103210810.GM4417@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111104074652.7b5eacb3@notabene.brown>
On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 07:46:52AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> What exactly do you mean by "expose both sizes" ??
> A new ioctl - BLKGETHPASIZE64 ??
>
> That might work, but I think it would be good if there were also an ioctl
> BLKHBALOCK which changed BLKGETSIZE64 to match BLKGETHPASIZE64.
> Then some user-space tools could examine the device with a full understanding
> of md, dm, dmraid, partitions, filesystems etc etc and make a reasonably
> informed decision. And then put that decision into effect.
In kernel, just another size field. Out of kernel, I was thinking
more along the line of a new /sysfs field, but yeah maybe another
ioctl. At this point, I don't really think making unlocking
selectable is a good idea. That has to go through device detach /
attach cycle and what if someone else is already using first half of
the disk? We can try to be sneaky and slip in device size change
underneath it but that just sounds too crazy to me. IMHO, we should
unlock by default and just let everyone know what the size before
unlocking was in case that could be useful.
Thank you.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-03 21:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <74AAB12B538EC94087A0D16AFDFC24F4045674@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>
2011-11-03 15:54 ` HPA unlock during partition scan of RAID components Tejun Heo
2011-11-03 19:00 ` Phillip Susi
2011-11-04 14:48 ` Tejun Heo
2011-11-04 15:42 ` Phillip Susi
2011-11-04 15:52 ` Tejun Heo
2011-11-04 16:26 ` Phillip Susi
2011-11-04 16:32 ` Tejun Heo
2011-11-04 21:08 ` Phillip Susi
2011-11-04 21:50 ` Tejun Heo
2011-11-05 1:29 ` Phillip Susi
2011-11-05 1:43 ` Tejun Heo
2011-11-05 2:26 ` Phillip Susi
2011-11-05 2:52 ` Tejun Heo
2011-11-05 3:50 ` Phillip Susi
2011-11-03 20:46 ` NeilBrown
2011-11-03 21:08 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2012-05-15 0:50 ` Charles Nordlund
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=20111103210810.GM4417@google.com \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=bzolnier@gmail.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=przemyslaw.hawrylewicz.czarnowski@intel.com \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.