Re: [PATCHSET] libata: implement ->set_capacity()

[Tejun Heo]

Hello,

On 05/13/2010 06:06 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> I'm not sure this is such a good interface ... it sounds very error
> prone for what is effectively a binary lock/unlock.

Well, the original block interface was like that.  It has been used as
binary switch tho.  The requested capacity is always ~0ULL and return
value smaller than the current capacity is ignored.  I'm all for
dropping the capacity parameter and the return value from
->set_capacity() so that it just unlocks native capacity and directly
sets the new capacity.  Jens?

> Instead of just saying unlock the HPA and show me the new capacity
> (with a rescan), you have to echo the right number of sectors to the
> set_capacity variable.  Isn't a hpa_unlock libata specific attribute
> better (you could even call BLKRRPART from the user context of the
> write)?

Hmmm... I lost you.  What are you talking about?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/