From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Rename REQ_COPY_USER to more descriptive REQ_HAS_TAIL_SPACE_FOR_PADDING Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 20:17:13 +0200 Message-ID: <20090709181713.GQ23611@kernel.dk> References: <4A563259.5000601@vlnb.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from brick.kernel.dk ([93.163.65.50]:46033 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752830AbZGISRO (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Jul 2009 14:17:14 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A563259.5000601@vlnb.net> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Vladislav Bolkhovitin Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, scst-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Tejun Heo , Boaz Harrosh , James Bottomley , FUJITA Tomonori On Thu, Jul 09 2009, Vladislav Bolkhovitin wrote: > Currently names of REQ_COPY_USER and __REQ_COPY_USER constants are confusing, > because they actually mean that the buffer for the corresponding requests > has space in the tail for padding in case of DMA padding restrictions. No, that's not what it means, the fact that there's padding room is a side effect of the map type. So I'd suggest adding a comment above that if {} in blk_rq_map_sg(), something that should have been there from the beginning. -- Jens Axboe