From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: factor out bio_check_eod() Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:31:17 +0200 Message-ID: <20070718123117.GU11657@kernel.dk> References: <20070530093503.GA15559@kernel.dk> <20070718105655.GB22374@htj.dyndns.org> <20070718105946.GC22374@htj.dyndns.org> <20070718110619.GM11657@kernel.dk> <469DF700.4030806@gmail.com> <20070718113103.GO11657@kernel.dk> <469DFA75.6070205@gmail.com> <20070718113450.GP11657@kernel.dk> <469DFC61.2070301@gmail.com> <20070718114558.GR11657@kernel.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070718114558.GR11657@kernel.dk> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: Neil Brown , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, David Chinner , Phillip Susi , Stefan Bader , Andreas Dilger List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Wed, Jul 18 2007, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Wed, Jul 18 2007, Tejun Heo wrote: > > Jens Axboe wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 18 2007, Tejun Heo wrote: > > >> Jens Axboe wrote: > > >>> On Wed, Jul 18 2007, Tejun Heo wrote: > > >>>> Jens Axboe wrote: > > >>>>> On Wed, Jul 18 2007, Tejun Heo wrote: > > >>>>>> End of device check is done twice in __generic_make_request() and it's > > >>>>>> fully inlined each time. Factor out bio_check_eod(). > > >>>>> Tejun, yeah I should seperate the cleanups and put them in the upstream > > >>>>> branch. Will do so and add your signed-off to both of them. > > >>>>> > > >>>> Would they be different from the one I just posted? No big deal either > > >>>> way. I'm just basing the zero-length barrier on top of these patches. > > >>>> Oh well, the changes are trivial anyway. > > >>> This one ended up being the same, but in the first one you missed some > > >>> of the cleanups. I ended up splitting the patch some more though, see > > >>> the series: > > >>> > > >>> http://git.kernel.dk/?p=linux-2.6-block.git;a=shortlog;h=barrier > > >> Alright, will base on 662d5c5e6afb79d05db5563205b809c0de530286. Thanks. > > > > > > 1781c6a39fb6e31836557618c4505f5f7bc61605, no? Unless you want to rewrite > > > it completely :-) > > > > I think I'll start from 662d5c5e and steal most parts from 1781c6a3. I > > like stealing, you know. :-) I think 1781c6a3 also can use splitting - > > zero length barrier implementation and issue_flush conversion. > > Yes that's true, I could split that in two as well. Will do so! Done, result in the same location. -- Jens Axboe