From: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>
To: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Cc: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
"msb@chromium.org" <msb@chromium.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"dm-devel@redhat.com" <dm-devel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] block: Move non-rotational flag to queue limits
Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 16:43:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DE4FE7C.7000903@fusionio.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <yq1d3izx7v2.fsf@sermon.lab.mkp.net>
On 2011-05-31 16:28, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>>>>>> "Jens" == Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com> writes:
>
> Jens> On 2011-05-31 04:19, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>>> - queue_flag_set_unlocked(QUEUE_FLAG_NONROT, disk->queue);
>>> + blk_queue_non_rotational(queue);
>
> Jens> I don't like this part of the change. Before it was immediately
> Jens> apparently that we were setting this flag, know you have no idea
> Jens> what it does. Please make that blk_queue_set_non_rotational().
>
> I was just trying to mimic the rest of the topology calls.
>
> How about:
>
> blk_queue_rotational(q, BLK_QUEUE_ROTATIONAL|BLK_QUEUE_NON_ROTATIONAL)
>
> Doing it that way would make the code clearer a few places too, I
> think...
I prefer having the function names be descriptive instead, but
consistency is good as well. The problem with the above approach is that
it usually requires defines to match, otherwise you don't know what the
arguments do. So lets rather fix up the other names for the next kernel.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-31 14:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-25 20:50 [PATCH] dm: pass up rotational flag Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-26 18:23 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-05-26 18:29 ` Martin K. Petersen
2011-05-26 18:43 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-05-26 18:48 ` Martin K. Petersen
2011-05-26 19:14 ` Jens Axboe
2011-05-27 2:42 ` Martin K. Petersen
2011-05-27 2:42 ` [PATCH 1/3] block: Introduce blk_set_stacking_limits function Martin K. Petersen
2011-05-27 13:03 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-05-27 2:42 ` [PATCH 2/3] block: Move non-rotational flag to queue limits Martin K. Petersen
2011-05-27 13:02 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-05-31 2:19 ` Martin K. Petersen
2011-05-31 12:49 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-05-31 13:14 ` Jens Axboe
2011-05-31 14:28 ` Martin K. Petersen
2011-05-31 14:43 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2011-05-27 2:42 ` [PATCH 3/3] block: Move discard and secure discard flags " Martin K. Petersen
2011-05-27 13:39 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-05-31 2:22 ` Martin K. Petersen
2011-07-13 15:46 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-05-27 16:20 ` Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-26 18:35 ` [PATCH v2] dm: pass up non-rotational flag Mike Snitzer
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=4DE4FE7C.7000903@fusionio.com \
--to=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=msb@chromium.org \
--cc=snitzer@redhat.com \
/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