Re: [PATCHSET] libata: implement ->set_capacity()

[Jens Axboe]

On Thu, May 13 2010, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On 05/13/2010 06:06 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > I'm not sure this is such a good interface ... it sounds very error
> > prone for what is effectively a binary lock/unlock.
> 
> Well, the original block interface was like that.  It has been used as
> binary switch tho.  The requested capacity is always ~0ULL and return
> value smaller than the current capacity is ignored.  I'm all for
> dropping the capacity parameter and the return value from
> ->set_capacity() so that it just unlocks native capacity and directly
> sets the new capacity.  Jens?

Is there a valid case for setting the capacity less than the unlocked
capacity? I would think the unlock/lock bool api is saner.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/