Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Badblock tracking for gendisks

2015-12-07 Thread Verma, Vishal L
Oops, sorry, should've been PATCH v3..
The contents are right, just the subject line is off.

-Vishal


On Mon, 2015-12-07 at 19:52 -0700, Vishal Verma wrote:
> v3:
>   - Add kernel-doc style comments to all exported functions in
> badblocks.c (James)
>   - Make return values from badblocks functions consistent with
> themselves
> and the kernel style. Change the polarity of badblocks_set, and
> update
> all callers accordingly (James)
>   - In gendisk, don't unconditionally allocate badblocks, export the
> initializer.
> This also allows the initializer to be a non-void return type, so
> that the
> badblocks user can act upon failures better (James)
> 
> 
> v2:
>   - In badblocks_free, make 'page' NULL (patch 1)
>   - Move the core badblocks code to a new .c file (patch 1) (Jens)
>   - Fix a sizeof usage in disk_alloc_badblocks (patch 2) (Dan)
>   - Since disk_alloc_badblocks can fail, check disk->bb for NULL in
> the
> genhd wrappers (patch 2) (Jeff)
>   - Update the md conversion to also ise the badblocks init and free
> functions (patch 3)
>   - Remove the BB_* macros from md.h as they are now in badblocks.h
> (patch 3)
> 
> Patch 1 copies badblock management code into a header of its own,
> making it generally available. It follows common libraries of code
> such as linked lists, where anyone may embed a core data structure
> in another place, and use the provided accessor functions to
> manipulate the data.
> 
> Patch 2 adds badblock tracking to gendisks (in preparation for use
> by NVDIMM devices).
> 
> Patch 3 converts md over to use the new badblocks 'library'. I have
> done some pretty simple testing on this - created a raid 1 device,
> made sure the sysfs entries show up, and can be used to add and view
> badblocks. A closer look by the md folks would be nice here.
> 
> Vishal Verma (3):
>   badblocks: Add core badblock management code
>   block: Add badblock management for gendisks
>   md: convert to use the generic badblocks code
> 
>  block/Makefile|   2 +-
>  block/badblocks.c | 576
> ++
>  block/genhd.c |  76 ++
>  drivers/md/md.c   | 516 ++---
> 
>  drivers/md/md.h   |  40 +---
>  include/linux/badblocks.h |  53 +
>  include/linux/genhd.h |   7 +
>  7 files changed, 741 insertions(+), 529 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 block/badblocks.c
>  create mode 100644 include/linux/badblocks.h
> N�r��yb�X��ǧv�^�)޺{.n�+{���"�{ay�ʇڙ�,j��f���h���z��w���
> ���j:+v���w�j�mzZ+�ݢj"��!�i

Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Badblock tracking for gendisks

2015-12-04 Thread Verma, Vishal L
On Wed, 2015-11-25 at 11:43 -0700, Vishal Verma wrote:
> v2:
>   - In badblocks_free, make 'page' NULL (patch 1)
>   - Move the core badblocks code to a new .c file (patch 1) (Jens)
>   - Fix a sizeof usage in disk_alloc_badblocks (patch 2) (Dan)
>   - Since disk_alloc_badblocks can fail, check disk->bb for NULL in
> the
> genhd wrappers (patch 2) (Jeff)
>   - Update the md conversion to also ise the badblocks init and free
> functions (patch 3)
>   - Remove the BB_* macros from md.h as they are now in badblocks.h
> (patch 3)
> 
> Patch 1 copies badblock management code into a header of its own,
> making it generally available. It follows common libraries of code
> such as linked lists, where anyone may embed a core data structure
> in another place, and use the provided accessor functions to
> manipulate the data.
> 
> Patch 2 adds badblock tracking to gendisks (in preparation for use
> by NVDIMM devices). Right now, it is turned on unconditionally - I'd
> appreciate comments on if that is the right path.
> 
> Patch 3 converts md over to use the new badblocks 'library'. I have
> done some pretty simple testing on this - created a raid 1 device,
> made sure the sysfs entries show up, and can be used to add and view
> badblocks. A closer look by the md folks would be nice here.
> 
> 
> Vishal Verma (3):
>   badblocks: Add core badblock management code
>   block: Add badblock management for gendisks
>   md: convert to use the generic badblocks code
> 

Ping.

Jens, are you ok taking this through the block tree?
Any other comments from anyone else?

Thanks,
-Vishal