On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 17:46:47 -0500 (EST), Kiyoshi Ueda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> if (scsi_status == 0) {
> - uptodate = 1;
> + error = 0;
> } else {
> - uptodate = 0;
> + error = -EIO;
> rq->errors = scsi_status;
> }
> - end_that_request_first(rq, uptodate, rq->hard_nr_sectors);
> - end_that_request_last(rq, uptodate);
> + if (__blk_end_request(rq, error, blk_rq_bytes(rq)))
> + BUG();
Acked-by: Pete Zaitcev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I follow the discussion, actually, and wanted to ask someone to look
closer if it's appropriate to use __blk_end_request() here.
My understanding was, blk_end_request() is the same thing, only
takes the queue lock. But then, should I refactor ub so that it
calls __blk_end_request if request function ends with an error
and blk_end_request if the end-of-IO even is processed? If not,
and the above is sufficient, why have blk_end_request at all?
-- Pete
--
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/
