Re: [PATCH -next] rsxx: Convert to DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE

[miaoqinglang]

å 2020/7/17 10:16, Jens Axboe åé:
> On 7/16/20 7:37 PM, miaoqinglang wrote:
> > å 2020/7/16 23:45, Jens Axboe åé:
> > > On 7/16/20 3:04 AM, Qinglang Miao wrote:
> > > > From: Liu Shixin <liushixin2@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > 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

.