From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f193.google.com ([209.85.223.193]:36474 "EHLO mail-io0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753157AbeEUPSj (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 May 2018 11:18:39 -0400 Received: by mail-io0-f193.google.com with SMTP id d73-v6so14709255iog.3 for ; Mon, 21 May 2018 08:18:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] convert block layer to bioset_init()/mempool_init() To: dsterba@suse.cz, Mike Snitzer , Kent Overstreet , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, hch@infradead.org, colyli@suse.de, darrick.wong@oracle.com, clm@fb.com, bacik@fb.com, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, neilb@suse.com References: <20180520222558.7053-1-kent.overstreet@gmail.com> <20180521140348.GA19069@redhat.com> <686d7df6-c7d1-48a6-b7ff-48dc8aff6a62@kernel.dk> <20180521151251.GX6649@twin.jikos.cz> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <87471185-1f64-2002-a7c8-f584ea6827a5@kernel.dk> Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 09:18:36 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180521151251.GX6649@twin.jikos.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 5/21/18 9:12 AM, David Sterba wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 08:19:58AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 5/21/18 8:03 AM, Mike Snitzer wrote: >>> On Sun, May 20 2018 at 6:25pm -0400, >>> Kent Overstreet wrote: >>> >>>> Jens - this series does the rest of the conversions that Christoph wanted, and >>>> drops bioset_create(). >>>> >>>> Only lightly tested, but the changes are pretty mechanical. Based on your >>>> for-next tree. >>> >>> By switching 'mempool_t *' to 'mempool_t' and 'bio_set *' to 'bio_set' >>> you've altered the alignment of members in data structures. So I'll >>> need to audit all the data structures you've modified in DM. >>> >>> Could we get the backstory on _why_ you're making this change? >>> Would go a long way to helping me appreciate why this is a good use of >>> anyone's time. >> >> Yeah, it's in the first series, it gets rid of a pointer indirection. > > This should to be also mentioned the changelog of each patch. There are > 12 subsystems changed, this could be about 10 maintainers and I guess > everybody has the same question why the change is made. Agree, the justification should be in this series as well, of course. Kent, might not be a bad idea to resend with a more descriptive cover letter. -- Jens Axboe