From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Ball Subject: Re: Changing the way MMC block request ends Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2012 09:54:04 -0400 Message-ID: <87y5q92cg3.fsf@laptop.org> References: <000001cd12ef$69e743e0$3db5cba0$@codeaurora.org> <000001cd13bb$b774ce30$265e6a90$@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: In-Reply-To: <000001cd13bb$b774ce30$265e6a90$@codeaurora.org> (Subhash Jadavani's message of "Fri, 6 Apr 2012 11:38:38 +0530") Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Subhash Jadavani Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org Hi Subhash, On Fri, Apr 06 2012, Subhash Jadavani wrote: > I looked into blk_update_bidi_request() function and it mainly updates bio's > of a request and doesn't look to do any manipulation with request queue > structure of block device. There are many block drivers (SCSI, IDE etc .) other > than MMC uses blk_end_request() rather than __blk_end_request(). Was > there any special reason we are using __blk_end_request() in MMC block > driver? If there is no specific reason, I would like to post a patch which would > make MMC driver to use blk_end_request(). It looks like we've been using __blk_end_request() since fd539832c in 2007, which is as long as we've been using the blk_end_request API. I haven't looked into it more closely, but it seems so far like there is no specific reason, and you should go ahead and post a patch along with your experimental results. Thanks! - Chris. -- Chris Ball One Laptop Per Child