From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
Niel Lambrechts <niel.lambrechts@gmail.com>,
FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] block: use the same failfast bits for bio and request
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:20:50 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A5626F2.7070404@garzik.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090709133746.GA21929@infradead.org>
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 09:45:24AM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> What's more disturbing to me is the different between RQ and BIO
>> flags. __REQ_* are bit positions, REQ_* are masks while BIO_* are bit
>> positions. Sadly it seems it's already too late to change that. I
>> personally an not a big fan of simple accessors or flags defined as
>> bit positions. They seem to obscure things without much benefit.
>
> flags as bit positions generally only make sense if you use
> test/set/clear_bit, otherwise they just confuse things. And the
> accessors are pretty annoying, especially in the block layer. Trying to
> find the places where a BIO flag has an actual effect is pretty painful
> due to the mix of the different flags and the accessors.
Indeed -- the accessors mean in practice that you always have at least
_two_ things to grep for, just to catch all accesses. Block layer is
pretty bad about that style of usage :/
Jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-09 17:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-03 8:48 [PATCHSET] block: fix merge of requests with different failfast settings Tejun Heo
2009-07-03 8:48 ` [PATCH 1/4] block: don't merge requests of " Tejun Heo
2009-07-03 8:48 ` [PATCH 2/4] block: use the same failfast bits for bio and request Tejun Heo
2009-07-05 9:27 ` Boaz Harrosh
2009-07-09 0:45 ` Tejun Heo
2009-07-09 9:12 ` Boaz Harrosh
2009-07-09 13:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-07-09 17:20 ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
2009-07-09 17:39 ` Jens Axboe
2009-07-10 13:18 ` Tejun Heo
2009-07-12 12:06 ` Boaz Harrosh
2009-07-15 9:27 ` Tejun Heo
2009-07-03 8:48 ` [PATCH 3/4] block: implement mixed merge of different failfast requests Tejun Heo
2009-07-05 9:27 ` Boaz Harrosh
2009-07-09 0:47 ` Tejun Heo
2009-07-09 9:17 ` Boaz Harrosh
2009-07-15 9:41 ` Tejun Heo
2009-07-03 8:48 ` [PATCH 4/4] scsi,block: update SCSI to handle mixed merge failures Tejun Heo
2009-07-03 10:54 ` [PATCHSET] block: fix merge of requests with different failfast settings 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=4A5626F2.7070404@garzik.org \
--to=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bharrosh@panasas.com \
--cc=fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=niel.lambrechts@gmail.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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