Il 03/07/2012 16:39, Vivek Goyal ha scritto:
>> > +static inline int bdev_discard_alignment(struct block_device *bdev)
>> > +{
>> > + struct request_queue *q = bdev_get_queue(bdev);
>> > +
>> > + if (bdev != bdev->bd_contains)
>> > + return bdev->bd_part->discard_alignment;
>> > +
>> > + return q->limits.discard_alignment;
>> > +}
>> > +
>> > static inline unsigned int queue_discard_zeroes_data(struct request_queue *q)
>> > {
>> > if (q->limits.max_discard_sectors && q->limits.discard_zeroes_data == 1)
>> > diff --git a/block/blk-lib.c b/block/blk-lib.c
>> > index b2bde5c..77d8869 100644
>> > --- a/block/blk-lib.c
>> > +++ b/block/blk-lib.c
>> > @@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ int blkdev_issue_discard(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t sector,
>> > /* Zero-sector (unknown) and one-sector granularities are the same. */
>> > granularity = max(q->limits.discard_granularity >> 9, 1U);
>> > mask = granularity - 1;
>> > - alignment = (q->limits.discard_alignment >> 9) & mask;
>> > + alignment = bdev_discard_alignment(bdev) >> 9;
> Why are you removing AND with mask operation? I don't see any AND
> operation being done in bdev_discard_alignment().
For partitions it is done by queue_limits_discard_alignment. For disks,
it shouldn't be necessary at all but I can leave it.
paolo
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
