Re: [PATCH v4 02/18] block: Rename BLK_STS_NEXUS to BLK_STS_RESV_CONFLICT

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On 3/20/23 8:06 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 11:36:12AM -0500, Mike Christie wrote:
>> I think we are ok for dasd using BLK_STS_RESV_CONFLICT.
>> It thought it sounded similar to SCSI/NVMe and userspace will still
>> see -EBADE because the blk_status_to_errno/errno_to_blk_status will
>> handle this.
>> There was no internal dasd code checking for BLK_STS_NEXUS.
>> There is a pr_ops API, but dasd is not hooked into it so we don't
>> have to worry about behavior changes.
> Yes, we don't have to worry about it.  I just find a bit confusing
> to have a PR-related error in a driver that doesn't use PRs.
> > Maybe add a little comment that it is used for some s390 or DASD
> specific locking instead.


[Index of Archives]     [Linux SCSI]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux