From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vivek Goyal Subject: Re: [patch 0/2] [V4] block: Support online resize of disk partitions Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 10:20:01 -0400 Message-ID: <20120710142001.GF14884@redhat.com> References: <20120709213418.799759100@redhat.com> <4FFB5DC3.30803@ubuntu.com> <20120710135759.GE14884@redhat.com> <4FFC387F.3070308@ubuntu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4FFC387F.3070308@ubuntu.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Phillip Susi Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, dm-devel@redhat.com, kzak@redhat.com, maxim.patlasov@gmail.com List-Id: dm-devel.ids On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 10:13:19AM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 7/10/2012 9:57 AM, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > +static inline sector_t part_nr_sects_read(struct hd_struct *part) > > +{ +#if BITS_PER_LONG==32 && defined(CONFIG_LBDAF) && > > defined(CONFIG_SMP) + sector_t nr_sects; + unsigned seq; + do { + > > seq = read_seqcount_begin(&part->nr_sects_seq); + nr_sects = > > part->nr_sects; + } while (read_seqcount_retry(&part->nr_sects_seq, > > seq)); + return nr_sects; +#elif BITS_PER_LONG==32 && > > defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT) > > Shouldn't this be BITS_PER_LONG==32 && defined(CONFIG_LBDAF) && > defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT)? No sense disabling preemption when the > sector size is also 32 bits. Yes. Good catch. We don't want to disable/enable preemption for 32bit UP kernels with sector size 32bit. I will modify the patch and repost soon. BTW, what happened to all the new lines in the code above. Looks like you mailer chewed these up. Thanks Vivek