Re: discard change to swapon(2) and swapon(8)

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

 



On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 05:32:47PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> Below is the patch I tested with.  I could sign it off, except for that
> #ifndef SWAP_FLAG_DISCARD business at the start (I'm rather hoping that

We have fallback solutions for many situations (include old system
headers), so the #ifdef is expected thing :-)

> Something else questionable about it, is that final "if (all && discard)
> swapon_usage(stderr, 1)" hunk: I'm not sure what's best when you
> "swapon -a -d", given that /etc/fstab can itself say "discard" or not;
> I took the easiest way to code it up, and made "swapon -a -d" an error.

Yes I agree, it's probably better to follow setting from the fstab file.
 
> @@ -582,6 +589,8 @@ swapon_all(void) {
>  		     opt = strtok(NULL, ",")) {
>  			if (strncmp(opt, "pri=", 4) == 0)
>  				pri = atoi(opt+4);
> +			if (strcmp(opt, "discard") == 0)
> +				discard = 1;
>  			if (strcmp(opt, "noauto") == 0)
>  				skip = 1;
>  		}
> @@ -605,6 +614,7 @@ swapon_all(void) {
>  	}
>  	fclose(fp);
>  
> +	discard = 0;

I think the discard=0 has to be also before opts parsing. (You don't
have to re-send the patch to fix this tiny bug.) 

    Karel

-- 
 Karel Zak  <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
 http://karelzak.blogspot.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux-ng" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux