On Monday 25 April 2005 12:16, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 24 2005, [email protected] wrote:
> > @@ -1099,6 +1104,7 @@ static int prepare_request(struct reques
> > if((rq_data_dir(req) == WRITE) && !dev->openflags.w){
> > printk("Write attempted on readonly ubd device %s\n",
> > disk->disk_name);
> > + WARN_ON(1); /* This should be impossible now */
> > end_request(req, 0);
> > return(1);
> > }
>
> I don't think that's a sound change. The WARN_ON() is strictly only
> really useful for when you need the stack trace for something
> interesting. As the io happens async, you will get a boring trace that
> doesn't contain any valuable information.
Ok, removed, and resending the patch, is the rest ok? I.e. is that supposed to
work? I gave a walk around and it seemed that the code handles
set_{disk,device}_ro() even during the open, but I'm no block layer expert.
Thanks for the review.
--
Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade
Skype user "PaoloGiarrusso"
Linux registered user n. 292729
http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
