From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/13] scsi: unify allocation of scsi command and sense buffer Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 03:41:24 -0400 Message-ID: <20090525074124.GA31746@infradead.org> References: <1243236668-3398-1-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> <1243236668-3398-6-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, chris.mason@oracle.com, david@fromorbit.com, hch@infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, jack@suse.cz, yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Jens Axboe Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:58453 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759811AbZEYHlZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 May 2009 03:41:25 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1243236668-3398-6-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 09:30:48AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > Fold the sense buffer into the command, thereby eliminating a slab > allocation and free per command. Might help to send it to linux-scsi to get people to review and apply it :) But that patch looks good to me, avoiding one allocation for each command and simplifying the code. I try to remember why these were two slabs to start with but can't find any reason. Btw, we might just want to declare the sense buffer directly as a sized array in the scsi command as there really doesn't seem to be a reason not to allocate it.