On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 09:19:28AM -0700, Verma, Vishal L wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-06-26 at 09:37 -0600, Keith Busch wrote:
> > The available_size attribute returns all the unused regions, but a
> > namespace has to use contiguous free regions. This patch uses the
> > attribute returning the largest capacity that can be created for
> > determining if the namespace can be created.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Keith Busch <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >  ndctl/lib/libndctl.c   | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  ndctl/lib/libndctl.sym |  1 +
> >  ndctl/libndctl.h       |  2 ++
> >  ndctl/namespace.c      |  2 +-
> >  4 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> Hi Keith,
> 
> The patch looks good, but just a couple of 'meta' comments.
> 1. We typically send ndctl patches separately from kernel patches (i.e. not
> thraded together).
> 2. for ndctl patches, an 'ndctl PATCH' prefix is recommended. You can set a
> repo local config parameter for doing this automatically on git format-
> patch.
>       git config format.subjectprefix "ndctl PATCH"
> 
> I'm thinking the kernel changes will be queued for 4.19, which means the
> ndctl changes will go into v62.

Thanks for the info. I'll make those changes for next time.

I think I may need to send a v2 for this. Should we have this fall back to
the available_size for the older kernels where the max_available_extents
attribute is not provided? I actually had that in my repo and used a
slightly older patch here, but I'm not sure if its okay to strongly
couple an ndctl release to a kernel version.
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm

Reply via email to