On 1/9/21 11:42 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Change the policy so that a BLKROSET on the whole device also affects
partitions. To quote Martin K. Petersen:
It's very common for database folks to twiddle the read-only state of
block devices and partitions. I know that our users will find it very
Change the policy so that a BLKROSET on the whole device also affects
partitions. To quote Martin K. Petersen:
It's very common for database folks to twiddle the read-only state of
block devices and partitions. I know that our users will find it very
counter-intuitive that setting /dev/sda read-o
On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 05:28:27PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Change the policy so that a BLKROSET on the whole device also affects
> partitions. To quote Martin K. Petersen:
>
> It's very common for database folks to twiddle the read-only state of
> block devices and partitions. I know th
On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 11:59:27AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 06:29:23PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > - test_bit(GD_READ_ONLY, &bdev->bd_disk->state);
> > > + return bdev->bd_read_only || get_disk_ro(bdev->bd_disk);
> > > }
> > > EXPORT_SYMBOL(bdev_read_only
On 12/8/20 5:28 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Change the policy so that a BLKROSET on the whole device also affects
partitions. To quote Martin K. Petersen:
It's very common for database folks to twiddle the read-only state of
block devices and partitions. I know that our users will find it very
Change the policy so that a BLKROSET on the whole device also affects
partitions. To quote Martin K. Petersen:
It's very common for database folks to twiddle the read-only state of
block devices and partitions. I know that our users will find it very
counter-intuitive that setting /dev/sda read-o
On 08/12/2020 10:28, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 12:27:41AM -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>>
>> Christoph,
>>
>>> The existing behavior is inconsistent in the sense that doing:
>>>
>>> permits writes. But:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> doesn't.
>>>
>>> And a subsequent:
>>
>> Looks lik
On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 06:29:23PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > - test_bit(GD_READ_ONLY, &bdev->bd_disk->state);
> > + return bdev->bd_read_only || get_disk_ro(bdev->bd_disk);
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(bdev_read_only);
>
> I think this patch should be folded into previous one, otherwise
On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 02:19:16PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Change the policy so that a BLKROSET on the whole device also affects
> partitions. To quote Martin K. Petersen:
>
> It's very common for database folks to twiddle the read-only state of
> block devices and partitions. I know th
On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 12:27:41AM -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>
> Christoph,
>
> > The existing behavior is inconsistent in the sense that doing:
> >
> > permits writes. But:
> >
> >
> >
> > doesn't.
> >
> > And a subsequent:
>
> Looks like the command line pieces got zapped from the comm
Christoph,
> The existing behavior is inconsistent in the sense that doing:
>
> permits writes. But:
>
>
>
> doesn't.
>
> And a subsequent:
Looks like the command line pieces got zapped from the commit
description.
In any case this fixes the issue for me. My read-only blktests succeed
with th
Change the policy so that a BLKROSET on the whole device also affects
partitions. To quote Martin K. Petersen:
It's very common for database folks to twiddle the read-only state of
block devices and partitions. I know that our users will find it very
counter-intuitive that setting /dev/sda read-o
12 matches
Mail list logo
