lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Bug in BLKBSZSET/GET ioctl ?
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 12:28:44PM +0800, Wanlong Gao wrote:
> On 12/29/2011 12:20 PM, Wu Fengguang wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 11:51:45AM +0800, Wanlong Gao wrote:
> >> Hi all:
> >>
> >> This is first reported to *libguestfs*: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624335
> >>
> >> Then, I looked into upstream util-linux and it seems nothing wrong. I'm not convinced that it's a kernel bug.
> >>
> >> produce:
> >>
> >> ---
> >> # ./util-linux/disk-utils/blockdev --getbsz /dev/sda6
> >> 4096
> >> # ./util-linux/disk-utils/blockdev --setbsz 2048 /dev/sda6
> >> # ./util-linux/disk-utils/blockdev --getbsz /dev/sda6
> >> 4096
> >> # ./util-linux/disk-utils/blockdev --setbsz 512 /dev/sda6
> >> # ./util-linux/disk-utils/blockdev --getbsz /dev/sda6
> >> 4096
> >
> > I think each blockdev invocation is working on a *new* bdev object.
>
>
> But the address of *new* bdev is the same?
> I did printk, and they all returned the same address.

Then the block size value should be reset in one of the bd_set_size()
calls in __blkdev_get().

> > You'll get consistent results if somehow keep it referenced, for
>
>
> But isn't it a bug? It seems that the setbsz has no effect?

Yeah, it does look like unexpected behavior to the end user..

Thanks,
Fengguang


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-12-29 05:43    [W:0.236 / U:1.028 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site