On 5 October 2012 19:01, Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com> wrote: > I'm not a fan of this either, but the alternatives are way more > complicated. We either need to rewrite the chardev subsystem, > specifically how mux'ed devices are registered and how the active one is > selected. Or we need to avoid flushing "unrelated" BHs for block > devices. Not sure of those read requests can be postponed.
Is this a regression? If it is then the obvious answer is to back out whatever broke it... -- PMM
