On Tue, Jul 10 2012 at 3:10pm -0400,
Chauhan, Vijay wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 10, 2012 4:27 AM, Mike Wrote:
> >As it happens, v2's changes to blk_limits_max_hw_sectors and
> >blk_queue_max_hw_sectors are not strictly required in order for existing
> >stacking drivers to have have an unconstraine
On Tuesday, July 10, 2012 4:27 AM, Mike Wrote:
>As it happens, v2's changes to blk_limits_max_hw_sectors and
>blk_queue_max_hw_sectors are not strictly required in order for existing
>stacking drivers to have have an unconstrained max_sectors. Dropping
>those changes also allows for consistency ac
On Mon, Jul 09 2012 at 10:57am -0400,
Mike Snitzer wrote:
> blk_set_stacking_limits() is intended to allow stacking drivers to build
> up the limits of the stacked device based on the underlying devices'
> limits. But in the case of 'max_sectors' the default of
> BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS (1024) doesn
3 matches
Mail list logo
