Re: [PATCH] block: correctly fallback for zeroout
From: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Date: 2016-06-03 03:07:43
Also in:
lkml
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2016-06-03 · Re: [PATCH] block: correctly fallback for zeroout · "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
- 2016-06-03 · Re: [PATCH] block: correctly fallback for zeroout · "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
- 2016-06-02 · Re: [PATCH] block: correctly fallback for zeroout · "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
- 2016-06-02 · Re: [PATCH] block: correctly fallback for zeroout · Shaohua Li <hidden>
- 2016-05-29 · Re: [PATCH] block: correctly fallback for zeroout · Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
"Christoph" == Christoph Hellwig [off-list ref] writes:
Christoph> As part of that I also removed the strange EOPNOTSUPP ignore, Christoph> but Mike reverted it just because it changed something in the Christoph> dm testsuite. Mike? Christoph> I still believe we should never ignore it in this helper, and Christoph> only do so in callers that believe it's the right thing. Yeah. I really wish EOPNOTSUPP would just go away except for ioctl callers. Now that we have real bi_error I don't understand why we need it. -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering