From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753563Ab2HIC4q (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Aug 2012 22:56:46 -0400 Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:57476 "EHLO mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751512Ab2HIC4o (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Aug 2012 22:56:44 -0400 Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 19:56:10 -0700 From: Kent Overstreet To: Tejun Heo Cc: linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, axboe@kernel.dk, agk@redhat.com, neilb@suse.de, drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com, vgoyal@redhat.com, mpatocka@redhat.com, sage@newdream.net, yehuda@hq.newdream.net Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 11/12] block: Add bio_clone_bioset() Message-ID: <20120809025610.GK7262@moria.home.lan> References: <1344290921-25154-1-git-send-email-koverstreet@google.com> <1344290921-25154-12-git-send-email-koverstreet@google.com> <20120808232120.GK6983@dhcp-172-17-108-109.mtv.corp.google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120808232120.GK6983@dhcp-172-17-108-109.mtv.corp.google.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 04:21:20PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 03:08:40PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote: > > This consolidates some code, and will help in a later patch changing how > > bio cloning works. > > I think it would be better to introduce bio_clone*() functions in a > separate patch and convert the users in a different one. > > > /** > > - * bio_clone - clone a bio > > + * bio_clone_bioset - clone a bio > > * @bio: bio to clone > > * @gfp_mask: allocation priority > > + * @bs: bio_set to allocate from > > * > > * Like __bio_clone, only also allocates the returned bio > > */ > > -struct bio *bio_clone(struct bio *bio, gfp_t gfp_mask) > > +struct bio *bio_clone_bioset(struct bio *bio, gfp_t gfp_mask, > > + struct bio_set *bs) > > { > > - struct bio *b = bio_alloc(gfp_mask, bio->bi_max_vecs); > > + struct bio *b = bio_alloc_bioset(gfp_mask, bio->bi_max_vecs, bs); > > > > if (!b) > > return NULL; > > @@ -485,7 +487,7 @@ struct bio *bio_clone(struct bio *bio, gfp_t gfp_mask) > > if (bio_integrity(bio)) { > > int ret; > > > > - ret = bio_integrity_clone(b, bio, gfp_mask, fs_bio_set); > > + ret = bio_integrity_clone(b, bio, gfp_mask, bs); > > > > if (ret < 0) { > > bio_put(b); > > @@ -495,6 +497,12 @@ struct bio *bio_clone(struct bio *bio, gfp_t gfp_mask) > > > > return b; > > } > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(bio_clone_bioset); > > + > > +struct bio *bio_clone(struct bio *bio, gfp_t gfp_mask) > > +{ > > + return bio_clone_bioset(bio, gfp_mask, fs_bio_set); > > +} > > So, bio_clone() loses its function comment. Also, does it even make > sense to call bio_clone() from fs_bio_set? I'll re add the function comment if you want, just for a single line wrapper I don't know if it's worth the cost - comments get out of date, and they're more stuff to wade through. > Let's say it's so, then > what's the difference from using _kmalloc variant? bio_kmalloc() fails if nr_iovecs > 1024, bio_alloc_bioset() fails if nr_iovecs > 256 and bio_alloc_bioset() is mempool backed, bio_kmalloc() is not. AFAICT that's it.