On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 06:15:18PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 03:13:21PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > > > > Looks good but I still think we need something like attached preparatory > > patch to not regress e.g. filesystem probing triggered by udev events. What > > do you think? > > Yes, I think it makes sense to add that. Actually, looking at it in a little more detail: this misses the explicit kobject_uevent calls for the capacity changes. I think the best idea might be something like this: ---
