Hans Reiser wrote:
It should be not 256, but BIO_MAX_PAGES, yes? Defining limits in two places is bad, yes?
Yeah, I think the code is running into two different limits here. Reiser4 wants it to be nr, but limits it to BIO_MAX_PAGES. However, apparently, the BIO_MAX_PAGES limit does not take into consideration the underlying 256 limit imposed by bio_alloc.
I'm not quite sure if having the two different limits is a bad thing in this case, unless BIO_MAX_PAGES can be made to (or is supposed to, and there's a bug) take into account the 256 limit.
I suppose the other solution is to not use bio_alloc et al due to the 256 limit, and find another method that allows values as large as BIO_MAX_PAGES, under the current implementation, will grow to.
