From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sagi Grimberg Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/14] block: Deprecate the use of the term sector in the context of block integrity Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 16:32:14 +0300 Message-ID: <53E22E5E.3060107@dev.mellanox.co.il> References: <1406320469-29352-1-git-send-email-martin.petersen@oracle.com> <1406320469-29352-6-git-send-email-martin.petersen@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-wg0-f42.google.com ([74.125.82.42]:33556 "EHLO mail-wg0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751276AbaHFNcS (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Aug 2014 09:32:18 -0400 Received: by mail-wg0-f42.google.com with SMTP id l18so2612891wgh.13 for ; Wed, 06 Aug 2014 06:32:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1406320469-29352-6-git-send-email-martin.petersen@oracle.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: "Martin K. Petersen" , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On 7/25/2014 11:34 PM, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > The protection interval is not necessarily tied to the logical block > size of a block device. Stop using the terms "sector" and "sectors". > > Going forward we will use the term "seed" to describe the initial > reference tag value for a given I/O. "Interval" will be used to describe > the portion of the data buffer that a given piece of protection > information is associated with. > > Signed-off-by: Martin K. Petersen Looks good to me, Reviewed-by: Sagi Grimberg