On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 13:32:34 -0700 Suzuki Kp <suzuki@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Erik, > > > Erik Mouw wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 10:37:49AM -0700, Suzuki Kp wrote: > > > >>Erik Mouw wrote: > >> > >>>I disagree. It's perfectly valid for a disk not to have a partition > >>>table (for example: components of a RAID5 MD device) and we shouldn't > >>>scare users about that. Also an unrecognised partition table format > >>>(DEC VMS, Novell Netware, etc.) is not a reason to throw an error, it's > >>>just unrecognised and as far as the kernel knows it's unpartioned. > >> > > [...] > > > Thank you very much for the inputs. > > As per the discussion I have made the changes to the patch. > > This change needs to be implemented in some of the partition checkers > which doesn't do that already. > > Btw, do you think it is a good idea to let the other partition checkers > run, even if one of them has failed ? > > Right now, the check_partition runs the partition checkers in a > sequential manner, until it finds a success or an error. This is all important information to capture in the patch changelog: it covers user-visible changes, it covers user-affecting problems with the present kernel, it describes the implications of making this change to the kernel, etc. All important stuff. So could you please send a complete changelog for this patch? > > * Fix rescan_partition to propagate the low level I/O error. > Not enough ;) > > > Signed Off by: Suzuki K P <suzuki@xxxxxxxxxx> > Please use "Signed-off-by:" This patch had tabs replaced with spaces, despite the fact that it was an attachment - that's a new one. Please get that fixed up for future patches, thanks. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
