From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: FUJITA Tomonori Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] removing the on-stack struct request Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:25:15 +0900 Message-ID: <20080423172500J.tomof@acm.org> References: <1208824002-3596-1-git-send-email-fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> <58cb370e0804220214va6b7379tfa5b18acf36fd1a7@mail.gmail.com> <20080423074010.GA8221@gollum.tnic> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mo11.iij4u.or.jp ([210.138.174.79]:59357 "EHLO mo11.iij4u.or.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752509AbYDWIZa (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2008 04:25:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080423074010.GA8221@gollum.tnic> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: petkovbb@gmail.com Cc: bzolnier@gmail.com, fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, jens.axboe@oracle.com On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 09:40:11 +0200 Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 11:14:28AM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > [..] > > > Looks promising but probably I'll not be able to review it properly > > this week (I'm busy with my real job) and the next week (I'll be busy > > with pushing overdue IDE updates). OTOH I'm hoping that Borislav > > would be able to take a look in the meantime. > > Yep, they're quite straight-forward and look fine except some nitpicking i sent > in separate mails. Thanks for reviewing, Yeah, these patches are pretty straightforward mainly because they are against the paths where we can use __GFP_WAIT. > FWIW, this is what we wanted to do initially but Jens didn't > agree to that at the time. I guess, it's because i probably didn't express > myself clearly enough then. See http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-kernel/2008/3/1/1037974 > for the whole discussion. I think that IDE uses request struct from interrupt context at some places. In such places, I don't think that converting requests on the stack and a pre-allocated fixed number of requests to kmalloc/blk_get_request with GFP_ATOMIC is an good idea. It's better to remove such code (allocating requests from interrupt context).