From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Bart.VanAssche@wdc.com (Bart Van Assche)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 15:28:35 +0000
Subject: [GIT PULL] nvme update for Linux 4.14, take 2
In-Reply-To: <38ddd70f-3fec-09c0-dafb-eba1e8f9cc18@grimberg.me>
References: <20170829150507.rjixn6uf3id6kltx@infradead.org>
 <9a27048d-1252-985f-c905-b738d709b204@kernel.dk>
 <38ddd70f-3fec-09c0-dafb-eba1e8f9cc18@grimberg.me>
Message-ID: <1504106914.2526.5.camel@wdc.com>

On Wed, 2017-08-30@18:10 +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> I just realized that patch:
> --
> commit d352ae205d8b05f3f7558d10f474d8436581b3e2
> Author: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche at wdc.com>
> Date:   Thu Aug 17 16:23:03 2017 -0700
> 
>      blk-mq: Make blk_mq_reinit_tagset() calls easier to read
> 
>      Since blk_mq_ops.reinit_request is only called from inside
>      blk_mq_reinit_tagset(), make this function pointer an argument of
>      blk_mq_reinit_tagset() instead of a member of struct blk_mq_ops.
>      This patch does not change any functionality but makes
>      blk_mq_reinit_tagset() calls easier to read and to analyze.
> --
> 
> Makes it impossible for me to move controller reset flow to
> nvme-core without adding a trampoline (as the reinit_request
> is transport specific)...

Hello Sagi,

Sorry but I doubt that that patch makes it "impossible" to move controller
reset flow to the NVMe core. There are already several function pointers in
the nvme_ctrl_ops data structure and there is one such data structure per
transport. Had you already considered to add a function pointer to that
structure?

Bart.