Re: [PATCH] block: fix blk_stack_limits() regression due to lcm() change

2015-03-30 Thread Martin K. Petersen
> "Mike" == Mike Snitzer writes: Mike> Linux 3.19 commit 69c953c ("lib/lcm.c: lcm(n,0)=lcm(0,n) is 0, not Mike> n") caused blk_stack_limits() to not properly stack queue_limits Mike> for stacked devices (e.g. DM). Mike> Fix this regression by establishing lcm_not_zero() and switching Mike>

[PATCH] block: fix blk_stack_limits() regression due to lcm() change

2015-03-30 Thread Mike Snitzer
Linux 3.19 commit 69c953c ("lib/lcm.c: lcm(n,0)=lcm(0,n) is 0, not n") caused blk_stack_limits() to not properly stack queue_limits for stacked devices (e.g. DM). Fix this regression by establishing lcm_not_zero() and switching blk_stack_limits() over to using it. DM uses

[PATCH] block: fix blk_stack_limits() regression due to lcm() change

2015-03-30 Thread Mike Snitzer
Linux 3.19 commit 69c953c (lib/lcm.c: lcm(n,0)=lcm(0,n) is 0, not n) caused blk_stack_limits() to not properly stack queue_limits for stacked devices (e.g. DM). Fix this regression by establishing lcm_not_zero() and switching blk_stack_limits() over to using it. DM uses blk_set_stacking_limits()

Re: [PATCH] block: fix blk_stack_limits() regression due to lcm() change

2015-03-30 Thread Martin K. Petersen
Mike == Mike Snitzer snit...@redhat.com writes: Mike Linux 3.19 commit 69c953c (lib/lcm.c: lcm(n,0)=lcm(0,n) is 0, not Mike n) caused blk_stack_limits() to not properly stack queue_limits Mike for stacked devices (e.g. DM). Mike Fix this regression by establishing lcm_not_zero() and switching