From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:47120 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726150AbfC1PDY (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Mar 2019 11:03:24 -0400 Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 08:03:20 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: clarify that bio_add_page() and related helpers can add multi pages Message-ID: <20190328150320.GB9265@infradead.org> References: <20190328035001.26276-1-ming.lei@redhat.com> <5258cad3-b324-660f-589f-73eb7fb8fa04@kernel.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5258cad3-b324-660f-589f-73eb7fb8fa04@kernel.dk> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Jens Axboe Cc: Ming Lei , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 08:21:55AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > This is going to create a needless conflict between 5.1 and the 5.2 > block tree. I haven't pushed the 5.2 tree out yet, plan to do so > this week after I've pushed the current 5.1 patches. Can you respin > this one on top of for-5.2/block when it comes out? Can we also drop the parameter name rename and just add the comments?