From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49EA5171078; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:54:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.95.11.211 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718085298; cv=none; b=ZUJirY8EQIrMS4gD937GI4n5p9vMHp2pYVJzsIk3R7/3M1wWIjI77jE5nUedB9y5+9CTKfJBn3gTpNSqUuTtPcwK1jMODVRMvKGwPf6d8V6PDeCgYQNw4sPq+atDOedrEsm4h7bW+MDLF1mO+Hd03hyDZIktg4mqmonLXpyGanM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718085298; c=relaxed/simple; bh=NKElyT0W8Njjwhy6wZ6e9p7e2rQH52zdXt2CykxF8Cs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=FpZR4Ywc9YhGwLQJRUvDA0N2ZnOwEVWNgZKnLPYtCHDwHli7NIjRpYjTj7EGquYnZPz8aBLqqdSTLia/aZjVZm7nfewe2RbkkJO/XpPbh4bgMvSrTPNWFOvGuUIHPQvkAwcD681u+fHck/t5oB7mzl1mlCF5MS6BuucmFrgFft0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lst.de; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.95.11.211 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lst.de Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id A7EA968BEB; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:54:53 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:54:53 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Damien Le Moal Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Jens Axboe , Geert Uytterhoeven , Richard Weinberger , Philipp Reisner , Lars Ellenberg , Christoph B??hmwalder , Josef Bacik , Ming Lei , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Jason Wang , Roger Pau Monn?? , Alasdair Kergon , Mike Snitzer , Mikulas Patocka , Song Liu , Yu Kuai , Vineeth Vijayan , "Martin K. Petersen" , linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com, nbd@other.debian.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux.dev, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, nvdimm@lists.linux.dev, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/26] loop: stop using loop_reconfigure_limits in __loop_clr_fd Message-ID: <20240611055453.GA3384@lst.de> References: <20240611051929.513387-1-hch@lst.de> <20240611051929.513387-4-hch@lst.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 02:53:19PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote: > > + /* reset the block size to the default */ > > + lim = queue_limits_start_update(lo->lo_queue); > > + lim.logical_block_size = 512; > > Nit: SECTOR_SIZE ? maybe ? Yes. I was following the existing code, but SECTOR_SIZE is probably a better choice here.