Linus, > No. That code is insane. It looks very fishy indeed to me, and I'm not > pulling it this late in the game. Yeah, my mess. Sorry. A couple of people poked me about this issue last week. I merged the patch without much scrutiny since several people had commented and tested when it was originally posted a few months back. In looking over the changes again, however, I agree with your assertion that it is fishy. > Just revert the oneliner SCSI change that caused the regression. My patch wasn't exclusively trying to address the regression wrt. drives that temporarily come up read-only. Device or fabric events can also trigger revalidate and there's a whole can of worms in that department thanks to the intersection between device characteristics changing and the partition table potentially being updated. This was my feeble attempt at fixing several long-standing issues in the read-only device handling which we occasionally hit. I'll drop the offending patch and revert Jeremy's change for now. And then revisit the gorge of eternal peril that is revalidate... -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering
