From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 002 of 5] Replace bio_data with blk_rq_data
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:21:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070816072114.GK23758@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18115.63917.990694.904646@notabene.brown>
On Thu, Aug 16 2007, Neil Brown wrote:
> On Thursday August 16, jens.axboe@oracle.com wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 16 2007, NeilBrown wrote:
> > >
> > > Almost every call to bio_data is for the first bio
> > > in a request. A future patch will add some accounting
> > > information to 'struct request' which will need to be
> > > used to find the start of the request in the bio.
> > > So replace bio_data with blk_rq_data which takes a 'struct request *'
> > >
> > > The one exception is in dm-emc were using
> > > page_address(bio->bi_io_vec[0].bv_page);
> > > is appropriate.
> >
> > This (and 3+4) just look like preparatory patches if we want to merge
> > the full patchset, not bug fixes. I seem to recall you had more bug
> > fixes or cleanups in your patchset, maybe I was mistaken. So nak for now
> > for 2-4, I'd apply 5 but it depends on the previous.
> >
>
> I don't remember other bug fixes, but I'll look through and check.
OK, I'm properly remembering incorrectly then.
> 2 and 3 are very simple changes that - I think - make it clearer what
> is happening.
To be honest, I don't see much win in using blk_rq_data() over
bio_data() at all. I'd much much rather just see it go away!
> And I felt 5 was a sufficient improvement to justify it and 4...
5 is nice, I would like to apply that :-)
> I'll go hunting and see what other preliminaries I can find.
Thanks!
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-16 7:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-16 5:13 [PATCH 000 of 5] Introductory patches for bio refactor NeilBrown
2007-08-16 5:13 ` [PATCH 001 of 5] Don't update bi_hw_*_size if we aren't going to merge NeilBrown
2007-08-16 7:01 ` Jens Axboe
2007-08-16 5:13 ` [PATCH 002 of 5] Replace bio_data with blk_rq_data NeilBrown
2007-08-16 7:02 ` Jens Axboe
2007-08-16 7:15 ` Neil Brown
2007-08-16 7:21 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2007-08-16 11:15 ` Neil Brown
2007-08-16 11:19 ` Jens Axboe
2007-08-16 11:22 ` Jens Axboe
2007-08-16 5:13 ` [PATCH 003 of 5] Replace bio_cur_sectors with blk_rq_cur_sectors NeilBrown
2007-08-16 5:13 ` [PATCH 004 of 5] Introduce rq_for_each_segment replacing rq_for_each_bio NeilBrown
2007-08-16 5:13 ` [PATCH 005 of 5] Merge blk_recount_segments into blk_recalc_rq_segments NeilBrown
2007-08-16 6:37 ` [PATCH 000 of 5] Introductory patches for bio refactor Jens Axboe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070816072114.GK23758@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=htejun@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.