Re: [026/146] block: dont block events on excl write for non-optical

Jens Axboe
2011-06-03T06:39:16Z

On 2011-06-03 08:02, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 11:15:56AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 2011-06-01 10:58, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 05:15:14PM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>>> Hello, Greg.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 04:59:22PM +0900, Greg KH wrote:
>>>>> 2.6.38-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------
>>>>> devices
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> commit d4dc210f69bcb0b4bef5a83b1c323817be89bad1 upstream.
>>>>>
>>>>> Disk event code automatically blocks events on excl write. This is
>>>>> primarily to avoid issuing polling commands while burning is in
>>>>> progress. This behavior doesn't fit other types of devices with
>>>>> removeable media where polling commands don't have adverse side
>>>>> effects and door locking usually doesn't exist.
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch introduces new genhd flag which controls the auto-blocking
>>>>> behavior and uses it to enable auto-blocking only on optical devices.
>>>>>
>>>>> Note for stable: 2.6.38 and later only
>>>>
>>>> This one should be accompanied by the following commit which is
>>>> currently in Jens' tree and will soon be pulled into Linus' tree.
>>>> Sorry about the fuss. ->check_events() update turned out to be much
>>>> more fragile than I originally expected. :(
>>>>
>>>> commit 4c49ff3fe128ca68dabd07537415c419ad7f82f9
>>>> Author: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
>>>> Date: Wed Jun 1 08:27:41 2011 +0200
>>>>
>>>> block: blkdev_get() should access ->bd_disk only after success
>>>
>>> As I can't take it into -stable until it hits Linus's tree, I'll have to
>>> wait until then. Hopefully it hits there soon, I'll watch out for it.
>>>
>>> thanks for letting me know.
>>
>> It'll go out in the next few days. The above commit also references this
>> patch, so you should have proper notification when it goes in.
>
> Did it go in? I see commit 0f48f2600911d5de6393829e4a9986d4075558b3
> which looks like it might have been it, right? Or do I need something
> else for .39-stable?

No, I haven't pushed it out yet, will do today. The above commit is just
a merge error fixup.

--
Jens Axboe