On Mon, May 18 2015 at 4:24am -0400, Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]> wrote:
> In general this looks good. But as Jan mentioned you need to > clear BIO_CHAIN when bi_remaining reaches zero OK I just replied to Jan -- I'm not yet understanding why. That said, I also don't have a problem with doing what you guys are asking. I'd just like to understand the problem you're forseeing because in practice I'm not hitting it in testing. > and I'd really prefer if bio_inc_remaining wuld not be left exported > and folded into bio_chain so that we prevent new abuses from showing > up and keep the code centralized. Your desire to make bio_inc_remaining() private is noted but I think the proposed blkdev_issue_discard_async() is useful. In the context of DM thinp's use of blkdev_issue_discard_async(): yes it is (ab)using bio_chain() and bio_inc_remaining() to setup the async IO completion scheme but it makes for a pretty clean solution to the problem of wanting to have an async interface for discard. -- 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/
