On Thu, Oct 04 2007, Pierre Ossman wrote: > On Thu, 4 Oct 2007 12:38:05 +0200 > Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 04 2007, Pierre Ossman wrote: > > > > > > Is that a yes or a no? You said that the ->page field was involved > > > in > > > > It's a conditional yes, re-read it :-) > > > > I didn't get the memo about what chained sg entries entail.
It's been posted here several times, but that's ok and it should not matter. I just can't answer your question with a clear yes or no, since it depends on certain situations. > > > list chaining, so does or doesn't it have to be initialized before a > > > call to sg_init_one()? > > > > That's not the problem. It has to be initialized before calling > > blk_rq_map_sg(). sg_init_one() will zero the entire sg entry, and that > > breaks if that particular sg entry is part of a larger sg table AND > > that sg entry happens to be the chain element. > > > > Ok, then it shouldn't affect my world at least. No, I think mmc is fine, it just needed that memset. > PS. Did someone forget to do a review of all blk_rq_map_sg() callers > before committing the chained list stuff? ;) Apparently this one got missed (and cciss), I'll do a new look just to be on the safe side. -- Jens Axboe - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/