From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Boaz Harrosh Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/28] blk_end_request: full I/O completion handler (take 3) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 16:09:28 +0200 Message-ID: <47555F98.8030504@panasas.com> References: <20071130.182351.115904044.k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com> <20071204121623.GQ23294@kernel.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bzq-219-195-70.pop.bezeqint.net ([62.219.195.70]:37046 "EHLO bh-buildlin2.bhalevy.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752712AbXLDOKY (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Dec 2007 09:10:24 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20071204121623.GQ23294@kernel.dk> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Jens Axboe , James Bottomley , FUJITA Tomonori Cc: Kiyoshi Ueda , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com On Tue, Dec 04 2007 at 14:16 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30 2007, Kiyoshi Ueda wrote: >> Hello Jens, >> >> The following is the updated patch-set for blk_end_request(). >> Changes since the last version are only minor updates to catch up >> with the base kernel changes. >> Do you agree the implementation of blk_end_request()? >> If there's no problem, could you merge it to your tree? >> Or does it have to be merged to -mm tree first? >> >> >> Boaz, >> Could you review the newly added PATCH 27 which converts the bidi part, >> and give me your comments? >> It uses blk_end_request_callback() in PATCH 25, which was only for >> the tricky ide-cd driver. >> If bidi added a 'resid' member to struct request instead of reusing >> 'data_len' for the other purpose, it could use the standard >> blk_end_request() instead. >> >> ------------------ Changes from the previous post --------------------- >> Changes between take2 and take3: >> o Rebased on top of 2.6.24-rc3-mm2 > > OK, so this means that I can't apply it unfortunately. It depends on > other patches in -mm (bidi). > > SCSI sits on block, so the best approach imho is to base this patchset > on mainline so I can include the block bits. > > I was wishing that the bidi work can go into 2.6.25, I guess that's James to say. If so than it is not important what order they go in. Or the patchset can be submitted in two parts, with scsi and remove-of- old-API in a later stage. Or *rant* Boaz can just rebase his work again *rant*. Kiyoshi, It's OK, if you have a maintainer that is willing to accept your work then go head, My code can wait, no problem. Just resolve the resid issue in scsi_io_completion() (See my other mail) Thanks for doing this Boaz