[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] size-in-bytes wrote:

> From Sat Feb 16 22:09:26 2002
> wrote:
> > /*
> >+ * blk_size_in_bytes contains the size of all block-devices in bytes
> >+ * (blk_size has too low a resolution, since we really need the size
> >+ * in 512 byte sectors, and fails on devices > 2 TB)
> >+ *
> >+ * blk_size_in_bytes[MAJOR][MINOR]
> >+ *
> >+ * if (!blk_size_in_bytes[MAJOR]) then no minor size checking is done.
> >+ */
> >+loff_t * blk_size_in_bytes[MAX_BLKDEV];
> >+
> >+/*
> Please pin it up the block device structure not to just another
> arbitrary global array.
>You miss the point of the patch, perhaps forgot to read the introduction :-)
>The point of the patch is that all applied occurrences of blk_size[][]
>have disappeared. All places in the code where a size is needed, that size
>comes from blkdev_size_in_bytes(), and the size comes in bytes, and the size
>is a loff_t.
>You want to remove these arrays - fine, so do I.
>(And of course I removed them a few times, but that is another story.)
>But that is an independent action. Whatever one planned to do with
>blk_size[][] now applies to blk_size_in_bytes[][].
>So, this patch is a step ahead but does not solve all the worlds problems
>at once.

Well I see that you have killed all places where it get's used - that's
But why don't just kill (fix) the initializations as well. You have already:


and friends right there at your hands ;-).

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:18    [W:0.070 / U:2.804 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site