From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756616AbZEaPa1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 May 2009 11:30:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755567AbZEaPaR (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 May 2009 11:30:17 -0400 Received: from mail-ew0-f176.google.com ([209.85.219.176]:34517 "EHLO mail-ew0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753664AbZEaPaQ (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 May 2009 11:30:16 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:message-id; b=DrQOmzdozb3d89FkC33DuO2awtGa6qyaj7suwGRM/FACLZkAxkcIbr4waAlTH/q8kJ OQuzsGWdLYFrppIe3TR/V4lJZDGe3/Ij/Yf8eA94N8DzkK1SZrLPcKJmaXXnWHdgW/fe xnqw+cESERM78DDuePnO453cfz7lsgZa/nl9M= From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz To: "Andries E. Brouwer" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] partitions/ide: improve Host Protected Area handling Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 17:34:54 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.11.3 (Linux/2.6.30-rc7-next-20090529-06589-g7701864-dirty; KDE/4.2.3; i686; ; ) Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Robert Hancock , Al Viro , Frans Pop References: <20090531143911.7164.26834.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20090531152403.GA26987@ub> In-Reply-To: <20090531152403.GA26987@ub> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200905311735.01244.bzolnier@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sunday 31 May 2009 17:24:03 Andries E. Brouwer wrote: > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 04:39:11PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > [HPA stuff deleted] > > Hi Bartlomiej, > > Apart from HPA one also has DCO, which functions rather similarly. > (I have not checked whether the current kernel knows anything about DCO.) > Have you thought about DCO? > Probably the kernel should by default not touch any such setting. > Maybe it should be reported? > A user space utility might change this setting - thus a disk can change size. We leave DCO handling entirely to user-space currently.