From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Subject: Re: [git pull] IDE fixes Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 16:57:49 +0200 Message-ID: <200906071657.49513.bzolnier@gmail.com> References: <200906071444.33047.bzolnier@gmail.com> <20090607152151.3cb01901@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <1244385536.8262.5.camel@mulgrave.site> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-fx0-f213.google.com ([209.85.220.213]:63383 "EHLO mail-fx0-f213.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753007AbZFGOwp (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Jun 2009 10:52:45 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1244385536.8262.5.camel@mulgrave.site> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley Cc: Alan Cox , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Stephen Rothwell , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sunday 07 June 2009 16:38:56 James Bottomley wrote: > On Sun, 2009-06-07 at 15:21 +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > > diff --git a/fs/partitions/check.c b/fs/partitions/check.c > > > index 99e33ef..4bc2c43 100644 > > > --- a/fs/partitions/check.c > > > +++ b/fs/partitions/check.c > > > > > > You seriously want to add code to the core partition handling logic > > moments before release when we know we have all sorts of devices with > > weird behaviours ? > > > > This should be .31 stuff where we can take the time to see how it works > > on all sorts of weird real world devices (eg those with 2K sector size) > > and the like. > > Absolutely seconded. > > Plus this is only one of the proposals for dealing with IDE native sizes > moving through the process. The other one is in libata with the gendisk > proposal for alt size instead of your set_capacity callback. The last ->set_capacity callback is needed for drivers/ide regardless of alt_size sysfs interface and it don't conflict with it in any way. Those patches are a complimentary work to Tejun's alt_size patches. They don't export anything to user-space. > thing we want is two separate mechanisms for this, so trying to push > anything upstream before we have agreement on direction is premature ... > trying to send a feature as a bug fix is doubly so. James, please (re-)read commits, then bug #13365 at kernel.org and if you still find some code parts controversial I'll be happy to discuss them. Thanks. Bart