From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.4 IDE core for 2.5 Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 15:16:39 +0200 Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: References: <20020709125656.GC1940@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Cc: Anton Altaparmakov , Linux Kernel , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 09 2002, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 09 2002, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, Anton Altaparmakov wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > > > I've forward ported the 2.4 IDE core (well 2.4.19-pre10-ac2 to be exact) > > > > > to 2.5.25. It consists of 7 separate patches: > > > > > > > > Fantastic! Seeing that the patches are bitkeeper generated, would it be > > > > possible for you to make a repository available with the patches? (on > > > > bkbits perhaps?) Would make it a lot easier for us bitkeeper users just to > > > > pull from your repository... Especially once you update the patches... > > > > > > Okay, tired of fantastic ;-) > > > This forward port has still broken PIO transfer on errors and really > > > borken multi PIO writes, all due to buffer_head -> bio transition in 2.5. > > > > As I wrote in the initial posting, yes multi pio is broken _for multi > > page bio's_. Where does 2.5 break pio transfers on error? If you are > > talking about a 2.4 code base error, then I don't care, you need to tell > > someone else :-) > > PIO on error is broken _for multi page bio's_ . Ok that falls into the same category as the multi pio one. I'll fix that as well. -- Jens Axboe