> I haven't read the code in depth, but taking running numbers and doing > bitwise "or" > on them looks a bit strange to me. > So here BIO_RW_SYNC is (3 | 4) = 7, that is the same as BIO_RW_FAILFAST_DEV. > So for example bio_failfast_dev and bio_sync are the same. Yes, this is clearly wrong. The fix seems to be to delete the definition of BIO_RW_SYNC, and everywhere that breaks, replace 1 << BIO_RW_SYNC with (1 << BIO_RW_SYNCIO) | (1 << BIO_RW_UNPLUG) - R. _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
