From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
James Bottomley <james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sd: fixup capacity calculation for 4k drives
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:31:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160321143130.GA12542@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1458563249-91200-1-git-send-email-hare@suse.de>
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 01:27:29PM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> in sd_read_capacity() the sdkp->capacity field changes its meaning:
> after the call to read_capacity_XX() it carries the _unscaled_ values,
> making the comparison between the original value and the new value
> always false for drives with a sector size != 512.
> So introduce a 'new_capacity' carrying the new, scaled, capacity.
While this fixes a bug and adds a comment to clarify things I think
the whole function is still a mess. And the way how your first
calculate new_capacity but then keep the duplicated scaling on
sdkp->capacity a littler later isn't really helpful either.
Is there any chance to rewrite it so that the unscaled capacity has its
own local variable, and sdkp->capacity is always either the correct
old or new capacity?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-21 14:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-21 12:27 [PATCH] sd: fixup capacity calculation for 4k drives Hannes Reinecke
2016-03-21 14:31 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2016-03-22 1:16 ` Martin K. Petersen
2016-03-22 6:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-03-22 7:14 ` Hannes Reinecke
2016-03-22 14:16 ` Ewan D. Milne
2016-03-29 1:14 ` Martin K. Petersen
2016-03-29 1:18 ` [PATCH v2] sd: Fix excessive capacity printing on devices with blocks bigger than 512 bytes Martin K. Petersen
2016-03-30 8:06 ` Hannes Reinecke
2016-03-30 16:34 ` Ewan D. Milne
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-03-29 8:06 [PATCH] sd: fixup capacity calculation for 4k drives Hannes Reinecke
2016-04-10 2:02 ` Lee Duncan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160321143130.GA12542@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).