On 2010-12-21 21:24, James Bottomley wrote: > On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 20:19 +0100, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 2010-12-21 19:09, James Bottomley wrote: >>> On Mon, 2010-12-20 at 10:20 -0600, James Bottomley wrote: >>>> Added cc: linux-scsi >>>> >>>> On Sat, 2010-12-18 at 18:42 +0100, Tejun Heo wrote: >>>>> Replace sd_media_change() with sd_check_events(). >>>>> >>>>> * Move media removed logic into set_media_not_present() and >>>>> media_not_present() and set sdev->changed iff an existing media is >>>>> removed or the device indicates UNIT_ATTENTION. >>>>> >>>>> * Make sd_check_events() sets sdev->changed if previously missing >>>>> media becomes present. >>>>> >>>>> * Event is reported only if sdev->changed is set. >>>>> >>>>> This makes media presence event reported if scsi_disk->media_present >>>>> actually changed or the device indicated UNIT_ATTENTION. For backward >>>>> compatibility, SDEV_EVT_MEDIA_CHANGE is generated each time >>>>> sd_check_events() detects media change event. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> Cc: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@xxxxxxxx> >>>>> --- >>>>> Here it is. The conflicts were due to Alan's recent patch, which was >>>>> in the similar direction anyway. >>>> >>>> This looks fine to me. Jens can you strip the SCSI patches out of your >>>> tree and I'll run them through a postmerge tree to get the fix up? >>> >>> Ping on this, please: I can't build a postmerge tree until block is >>> sorted out. I need these four removing: >> >> I would need to revert those four then, I can't rebase any of those >> branches. > > That's a bit unfortunate. OK, just revert the sd one then. Hopefully > we're close enough to the merge window that we won't pick up conflicts > in the others. Done, sd patch reverted and pushed out. -- Jens Axboe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
