From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: lk 3.17-rc4 blk_mq large write problems Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 12:26:57 -0600 Message-ID: <541097F1.8030808@kernel.dk> References: <540FCB96.8000606@interlog.com> <20140910154144.GA22296@infradead.org> <541080B5.8080505@kernel.dk> <20140910180957.GA17495@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f43.google.com ([209.85.220.43]:39142 "EHLO mail-pa0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750882AbaIJS0t (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Sep 2014 14:26:49 -0400 Received: by mail-pa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id fa1so7504500pad.16 for ; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 11:26:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140910180957.GA17495@infradead.org> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Douglas Gilbert , SCSI development list On 09/10/2014 12:09 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 10:47:49AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >> BTW, please don't mix up the REQ_END and ->queue_rq() changes with the >> changed start_request API. > > I have to. It's set by start_request, so we need to pass down the last > argument to keep the old behavior. And once we pass the argument we > can just it directly. It could still be done in the caller, but arguably, you'd have to do it twice unless the ->queue_rq() call was rolled into a function. -- Jens Axboe