From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
James Bottomley <james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sd: fixup capacity calculation for 4k drives
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:31:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160321143130.GA12542@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1458563249-91200-1-git-send-email-hare@suse.de>
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 01:27:29PM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> in sd_read_capacity() the sdkp->capacity field changes its meaning:
> after the call to read_capacity_XX() it carries the _unscaled_ values,
> making the comparison between the original value and the new value
> always false for drives with a sector size != 512.
> So introduce a 'new_capacity' carrying the new, scaled, capacity.
While this fixes a bug and adds a comment to clarify things I think
the whole function is still a mess. And the way how your first
calculate new_capacity but then keep the duplicated scaling on
sdkp->capacity a littler later isn't really helpful either.
Is there any chance to rewrite it so that the unscaled capacity has its
own local variable, and sdkp->capacity is always either the correct
old or new capacity?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-21 14:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-21 12:27 [PATCH] sd: fixup capacity calculation for 4k drives Hannes Reinecke
2016-03-21 14:31 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2016-03-22 1:16 ` Martin K. Petersen
2016-03-22 6:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-03-22 7:14 ` Hannes Reinecke
2016-03-22 14:16 ` Ewan D. Milne
2016-03-29 1:14 ` Martin K. Petersen
2016-03-29 1:18 ` [PATCH v2] sd: Fix excessive capacity printing on devices with blocks bigger than 512 bytes Martin K. Petersen
2016-03-30 8:06 ` Hannes Reinecke
2016-03-30 16:34 ` Ewan D. Milne
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-03-29 8:06 [PATCH] sd: fixup capacity calculation for 4k drives Hannes Reinecke
2016-04-10 2:02 ` Lee Duncan
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=20160321143130.GA12542@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.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.