From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jun'ichi Nomura" Subject: Re: [PATCH UPDATED] block: restore multiple bd_link_disk_holder() support Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 09:18:04 +0900 Message-ID: <4D338ABC.7020600@ce.jp.nec.com> References: <16069.1294853673@localhost> <4D2E4611.90002@redhat.com> <4D2E6129.8000700@ce.jp.nec.com> <20110113172133.GE14096@htj.dyndns.org> <4D2F4799.5030901@redhat.com> <4D2FFBED.6010406@ce.jp.nec.com> <20110114161043.GB978@htj.dyndns.org> <4D30BB78.5020101@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4D30BB78.5020101@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Milan Broz , Tejun Heo Cc: Jens Axboe , Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, Alexander Viro , Neil Brown , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, device-mapper development , Kay Sievers , Alasdair G Kergon List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 01/15/11 06:09, Milan Broz wrote: > On 01/14/2011 05:10 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: >> Commit e09b457b (block: simplify holder symlink handling) incorrectly >> assumed that there is only one link at maximum. dm may use multiple >> links and expects block layer to track reference count for each link, >> which is different from and unrelated to the exclusive device holder >> identified by @holder when the device is opened. >> >> Remove the single holder assumption and automatic removal of the link >> and revive the per-link reference count tracking. The code >> essentially behaves the same as before commit e09b457b sans the >> unnecessary kobject reference count dancing. >> >> While at it, note that this facility should not be used by anyone else >> than the current ones. Sysfs symlinks shouldn't be abused like this >> and the whole thing doesn't belong in the block layer at all. >> >> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo >> Reported-by: Milan Broz >> Cc: Jun'ichi Nomura >> Cc: Neil Brown >> Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org >> Cc: Kay Sievers >> --- >> Thanks for the test commands. They were very helpful. Can you please >> test this one? > > Hi, > > yes, this one works for me. I run full lvm2 testsuite and no warnings. > Thanks! > > Tested-by: Milan Broz Thanks Tejun, Milan! If it passed my quick test and the lvm2 testsuite, I have nothing to add here. And the code looks ok, too. -- Jun'ichi Nomura, NEC Corporation