linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 07/14] block: reorganize request fetching functions

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090422100916.GZ4593@kernel.dk>
Date:	Wed, 22 Apr 2009 12:09:16 +0200
From:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	bzolnier@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/14] block: reorganize request fetching functions

On Tue, Apr 21 2009, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 01:37:54AM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Impact: code reorganization
> > 
> > elv_next_request() and elv_dequeue_request() are public block layer
> > interface than actual elevator implementation.  They mostly deal with
> > how requests interact with block layer and low level drivers at the
> > beginning of rqeuest processing whereas __elv_next_request() is the
> > actual eleveator request fetching interface.
> > 
> > Move the two functions to blk-core.c.  This prepares for further
> > interface cleanup.
> 
> As a follow-up patch you might want to rename them to have a more
> descriptive prefix than elv_ and add some kerneldoc comments for them.

Hmm dunno, elv_ is fine with me. kerneldoc is always nice, though.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/