From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 002 of 5] Replace bio_data with blk_rq_data
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:21:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070816072114.GK23758@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18115.63917.990694.904646@notabene.brown>
On Thu, Aug 16 2007, Neil Brown wrote:
> On Thursday August 16, jens.axboe@oracle.com wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 16 2007, NeilBrown wrote:
> > >
> > > Almost every call to bio_data is for the first bio
> > > in a request. A future patch will add some accounting
> > > information to 'struct request' which will need to be
> > > used to find the start of the request in the bio.
> > > So replace bio_data with blk_rq_data which takes a 'struct request *'
> > >
> > > The one exception is in dm-emc were using
> > > page_address(bio->bi_io_vec[0].bv_page);
> > > is appropriate.
> >
> > This (and 3+4) just look like preparatory patches if we want to merge
> > the full patchset, not bug fixes. I seem to recall you had more bug
> > fixes or cleanups in your patchset, maybe I was mistaken. So nak for now
> > for 2-4, I'd apply 5 but it depends on the previous.
> >
>
> I don't remember other bug fixes, but I'll look through and check.
OK, I'm properly remembering incorrectly then.
> 2 and 3 are very simple changes that - I think - make it clearer what
> is happening.
To be honest, I don't see much win in using blk_rq_data() over
bio_data() at all. I'd much much rather just see it go away!
> And I felt 5 was a sufficient improvement to justify it and 4...
5 is nice, I would like to apply that :-)
> I'll go hunting and see what other preliminaries I can find.
Thanks!
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-16 7:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-16 5:13 [PATCH 000 of 5] Introductory patches for bio refactor NeilBrown
2007-08-16 5:13 ` [PATCH 001 of 5] Don't update bi_hw_*_size if we aren't going to merge NeilBrown
2007-08-16 7:01 ` Jens Axboe
2007-08-16 5:13 ` [PATCH 002 of 5] Replace bio_data with blk_rq_data NeilBrown
2007-08-16 7:02 ` Jens Axboe
2007-08-16 7:15 ` Neil Brown
2007-08-16 7:21 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2007-08-16 11:15 ` Neil Brown
2007-08-16 11:19 ` Jens Axboe
2007-08-16 11:22 ` Jens Axboe
2007-08-16 5:13 ` [PATCH 003 of 5] Replace bio_cur_sectors with blk_rq_cur_sectors NeilBrown
2007-08-16 5:13 ` [PATCH 004 of 5] Introduce rq_for_each_segment replacing rq_for_each_bio NeilBrown
2007-08-16 5:13 ` [PATCH 005 of 5] Merge blk_recount_segments into blk_recalc_rq_segments NeilBrown
2007-08-16 6:37 ` [PATCH 000 of 5] Introductory patches for bio refactor Jens Axboe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070816072114.GK23758@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=htejun@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox