在 2020/7/17 10:16, Jens Axboe 写道:

On 7/16/20 7:37 PM, miaoqinglang wrote:

quoted

在 2020/7/16 23:45, Jens Axboe 写道:

quoted

On 7/16/20 3:04 AM, Qinglang Miao wrote:

quoted

From: Liu Shixin <redacted>

Use DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE macro to simplify the code.

None of these apply against the 5.9 block tree, looks like some
read -> read_iter conversion has happened in another branch that
I'm not privy to.

Hi Jens,

      Sorry I didn't mention it in commit log, but this patch is based
on linux-next where commit <4d4901c6d7> has switched over direct
seq_read method calls to seq_read_iter, this is why there's conflict in
your apply.

      Do you think I should send a new patch based on 5.8rc?

That'll just create a needless conflict. But I don't even know what tree
is carrying the patch that changes it to use seq_read_iter, so hard to
make other suggestions.

This patch is against linux-next, which is ahead of both
linux-block and mainline tree.  Here's the interlinkage:

https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next/+/4d4901c6d748efab8aab6e7d2405dadaed0bea50](javascript:;)

or you can find the commit <4d4901c6d7> which changes seq_read to 
seq_read_iter with the -next tag, in fact, it's just a simple script:

sed -i -e 's/\.read\(\s*=\s*\)seq_read/\.read_iter\1seq_read_iter/g'

By the way, there won't be needless confict because seq_read in both
file and macro are switched to seq_read_iter together.

Alternatively, I can hang on to them until the other change hits
mainline, and then queue them up after that.

That looks good to me. Let me know if patch based on 5.8rc is needed.

Thanks.

Qinglang

.