MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4F4DDE14.8050406@redhat.com>
References: <1329464338-8351-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
 <4F4B78CE.4010405@redhat.com> <CA+55aFyoTxFcHZXa=XfxrK1JB0cksHxQPsRUiJnhAFeE=-hynw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F4DDE14.8050406@redhat.com>
From: Ray Lee <ray-lk@madrabbit.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:56:47 -0800
Message-ID: <CADU53JUvh1a=0NgN87jV24PLY6GJma2bW=kFK_5ejFEp1djwEQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] block: avoid false positive warnings on ioctl to partition
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        stable@vger.kernel.org, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1155
Lines: 29

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Il 29/02/2012 01:14, Linus Torvalds ha scritto:
> > So I'm still not convinced this is safe, and feel a bit worried about
> > us possibly silently missing some things. That
> >
> >    default:
> >       return -ENOIOCTLCMD;
> >
> > is what worries me.
> >
> > Blocking the ones we *know* about and understand I'm perfectly fine
> > with. And the SG_IO case looks fine. It's the possibly unknown users
> > that still worry me.
>
> I understand.
>
> But being 100% sure that nothing breaks is
> impossible, unfortunately, so does it make sense to aim at 100%?  And it
> should be extremely easy to bisect failures.  Even with all the
> differences, it reminds me of the recent change to poll.

You can help avoid the bisect entirely by silently dropping the ones
you're sure about, and noisily dropping the ones you aren't.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/