From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 520AEC83012 for ; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 09:55:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [63.128.21.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 913102222A for ; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 09:55:36 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 913102222A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=tempfail smtp.mailfrom=dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-276-IKQKqi5AP_qiK7lFrJkEyQ-1; Wed, 02 Dec 2020 04:55:32 -0500 X-MC-Unique: IKQKqi5AP_qiK7lFrJkEyQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01FE9101AFC6; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 09:55:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (colo-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.20]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DAE2163B8C; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 09:55:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.19.33]) by colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADBC01809CA0; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 09:55:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.5]) by lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 0B26VueP018314 for ; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 01:31:56 -0500 Received: by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) id 3175DA9F1E; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 06:31:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast03.extmail.prod.ext.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.55.19]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AE0FA9EF3 for ; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 06:31:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7599811E78 for ; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 06:31:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from out30-130.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-130.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.130]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-546-_DqpmJbfPeu8NCNDQn6Xkg-1; Wed, 02 Dec 2020 01:31:49 -0500 X-MC-Unique: _DqpmJbfPeu8NCNDQn6Xkg-1 X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=PASS; BC=-1|-1; BR=01201311R511e4; CH=green; DM=||false|; DS=||; FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1; HT=e01e04407; MF=jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com; NM=1; PH=DS; RN=4; SR=0; TI=SMTPD_---0UHIap1W_1606890704 Received: from admindeMacBook-Pro-2.local(mailfrom:jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0UHIap1W_1606890704) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(127.0.0.1); Wed, 02 Dec 2020 14:31:44 +0800 To: Mike Snitzer References: <20201201160709.31748-1-snitzer@redhat.com> <20201202033855.60882-1-jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> <20201202033855.60882-2-jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> <20201202050343.GA20535@redhat.com> <20201202051438.GB20535@redhat.com> From: JeffleXu Message-ID: Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:31:44 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201202051438.GB20535@redhat.com> X-Mimecast-Impersonation-Protect: Policy=CLT - Impersonation Protection Definition; Similar Internal Domain=false; Similar Monitored External Domain=false; Custom External Domain=false; Mimecast External Domain=false; Newly Observed Domain=false; Internal User Name=false; Custom Display Name List=false; Reply-to Address Mismatch=false; Targeted Threat Dictionary=false; Mimecast Threat Dictionary=false; Custom Threat Dictionary=false X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.11.54.5 X-loop: dm-devel@redhat.com X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 02 Dec 2020 04:55:04 -0500 Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com, dm-devel@redhat.com Subject: Re: [dm-devel] dm: use gcd() to fix chunk_sectors limit stacking X-BeenThere: dm-devel@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: junk List-Id: device-mapper development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 12/2/20 1:14 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote: > On Wed, Dec 02 2020 at 12:03am -0500, > Mike Snitzer wrote: > >> What you've done here is fairly chaotic/disruptive: >> 1) you emailed a patch out that isn't needed or ideal, I dealt already >> staged a DM fix in linux-next for 5.10-rcX, see: >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/device-mapper/linux-dm.git/commit/?h=dm-5.10-rcX&id=f28de262ddf09b635095bdeaf0e07ff507b3c41b >> 2) you replied to your patch and started referencing snippets of this >> other patch's header (now staged for 5.10-rcX via Jens' block tree): >> https://git.kernel.dk/cgit/linux-block/commit/?h=block-5.10&id=7e7986f9d3ba69a7375a41080a1f8c8012cb0923 >> - why not reply to _that_ patch in response something stated in it? > > I now see you did reply to the original v2 patch: > https://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2020-December/msg00006.html > > but you changed the Subject to have a "dm" prefix for some reason. In my original purpose, this is a new patch, 'dm: XXXXXXXX'. This patch should coexist with your patch 'block: XXXXXX'. Can I say that it's totally a mistake ;) > Strange but OK.. though it got really weird when you cut-and-paste your > other DM patch in reply at the bottom of your email. If you find > yourself cross referencing emails and cutting and pasting like that, you > probably shouldn't. Makes it chaotic for others to follow along. > > Thanks, > Mike > -- Thanks, Jeffle -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7809CC64E7C for ; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 06:32:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27C0B22206 for ; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 06:32:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728571AbgLBGc3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Dec 2020 01:32:29 -0500 Received: from out30-44.freemail.mail.aliyun.com ([115.124.30.44]:59217 "EHLO out30-44.freemail.mail.aliyun.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728345AbgLBGc3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Dec 2020 01:32:29 -0500 X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R511e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=e01e04407;MF=jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=4;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0UHIap1W_1606890704; Received: from admindeMacBook-Pro-2.local(mailfrom:jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0UHIap1W_1606890704) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(127.0.0.1); Wed, 02 Dec 2020 14:31:44 +0800 Subject: Re: dm: use gcd() to fix chunk_sectors limit stacking To: Mike Snitzer Cc: dm-devel@redhat.com, joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org References: <20201201160709.31748-1-snitzer@redhat.com> <20201202033855.60882-1-jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> <20201202033855.60882-2-jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> <20201202050343.GA20535@redhat.com> <20201202051438.GB20535@redhat.com> From: JeffleXu Message-ID: Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:31:44 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201202051438.GB20535@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On 12/2/20 1:14 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote: > On Wed, Dec 02 2020 at 12:03am -0500, > Mike Snitzer wrote: > >> What you've done here is fairly chaotic/disruptive: >> 1) you emailed a patch out that isn't needed or ideal, I dealt already >> staged a DM fix in linux-next for 5.10-rcX, see: >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/device-mapper/linux-dm.git/commit/?h=dm-5.10-rcX&id=f28de262ddf09b635095bdeaf0e07ff507b3c41b >> 2) you replied to your patch and started referencing snippets of this >> other patch's header (now staged for 5.10-rcX via Jens' block tree): >> https://git.kernel.dk/cgit/linux-block/commit/?h=block-5.10&id=7e7986f9d3ba69a7375a41080a1f8c8012cb0923 >> - why not reply to _that_ patch in response something stated in it? > > I now see you did reply to the original v2 patch: > https://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2020-December/msg00006.html > > but you changed the Subject to have a "dm" prefix for some reason. In my original purpose, this is a new patch, 'dm: XXXXXXXX'. This patch should coexist with your patch 'block: XXXXXX'. Can I say that it's totally a mistake ;) > Strange but OK.. though it got really weird when you cut-and-paste your > other DM patch in reply at the bottom of your email. If you find > yourself cross referencing emails and cutting and pasting like that, you > probably shouldn't. Makes it chaotic for others to follow along. > > Thanks, > Mike > -- Thanks, Jeffle