On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 09:49:44PM -0400, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > >> What does the extra io_err buy us? Just have this function return an > >> error. And then in blkdev_issue_discard if you get -EOPNOTSUPP you > >> special case it there. > > Shaohua> The __blkdev_issue_discard returns -EOPNOTSUPP if disk doesn't > Shaohua> support discard. in that case, blkdev_issue_discard doesn't > Shaohua> return 0. blkdev_issue_discard only returns 0 if IO error is > Shaohua> -EOPNOTSUPP. > > Oh, I see. The sanity checks are now in __blkdev_issue_discard() so > there is no way to distinguish between -EOPNOTSUPP and the other > -EOPNOTSUPP. *sigh* We can move the sanity checks out. Or even better get rid of the stupid behavior of ignoring the late -EOPNOTSUPP in this low level helper and instead leaving it to the caller(s) that care. So far the DM test suite seems to be the only one that does. > I am OK with your patch as a stable fix but this really needs to be > fixed up properly. And I'd much prefer to get this right now. It's not like this is recently introduced behavior. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-block" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
