Re: [PATCH] [9/20] Add blk_kmalloc/blk_alloc_pages

[Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>]

On Mon, Mar 17 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Look further down in the email, queue_bounce_to_mask() or whatever you
> > would want to call it. As also written there, the PRINCIPLE is the same.
> > And that is that exporting a to_allocator_mask() helper is a lot saner
> > than exporting an allocator api tied to the queue.
> > 
> > Can we get over this, please?
> 
> Ok it would have helped if you had explained why it is saner, but I 
> bow to your superior experience on block layer issues.

Do I detect just a touch of sarcasm there? Andi, I have in (approx) 4
emails explained why I think it is saner. It's even right there, above
your own text here. I'm not sure how much more I can say...

> The only open issue is right now if it isn't better to go back
> for automatic bouncing for SCSI scan and the other users. Do you
> have an opinion on that too? If you have one can you please convince
> James of it too.

Sure, I also wrote that in several emails - I'm fine with bouncing for
the scanning, it's not a big deal imho. I can see why James may not like
it so much since we can fairly easily avoid the bounce, but as I wrote
in the previous email, I think that doing a bit of bounce there may not
be such a bad idea after all.

-- 
Jens Axboe