On 05/04/2016 01:31 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 06:24:10PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
Yauhen reported in the ML that s_bdev is null at mount, and
s_bdev gets updated to some device when missing device is
replaced, as because bdev is null for missing device, things
gets match
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 11:34:50PM +0300, Yauhen Kharuzhy wrote:
> On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 07:31:48PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 06:24:10PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
> > > Yauhen reported in the ML that s_bdev is null at mount, and
> > > s_bdev gets updated to some device
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 07:31:48PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 06:24:10PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
> > Yauhen reported in the ML that s_bdev is null at mount, and
> > s_bdev gets updated to some device when missing device is
> > replaced, as because bdev is null for missing
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 06:24:10PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
> Yauhen reported in the ML that s_bdev is null at mount, and
> s_bdev gets updated to some device when missing device is
> replaced, as because bdev is null for missing device, things
> gets matched up. Fix this by checking if s_bdev is s
Yauhen reported in the ML that s_bdev is null at mount, and
s_bdev gets updated to some device when missing device is
replaced, as because bdev is null for missing device, things
gets matched up. Fix this by checking if s_bdev is set. I
didn't want to completely remove updating s_bdev because
the f
