[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A0A6003.8060800@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 14:52:03 +0900
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
CC: Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@...jp.nec.com>,
Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>,
FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, benh@...nel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] swim3: use blk_end_request instead of blk_update_request
Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> Yeah, conversion was easy that way. I think it's sane to have
>>> blk_update_request() exported as long as request internal tinkering is
>>> kept in block layer proper.
>> blk_update_request() is needed for request-based dm to keep the request
>> completion ordering in bottom-up, although request-based dm is not
>> in upstream yet.
>>
>> Jens, please keep blk_update_request() exported.
>
> I did, I applied the swim3 patches yesterday as well.
I don't think the patch is correct. If it calls
blk_end_request_all(), it should also clear the current request which
the patch doesn't. Also, given that the driver doesn't support
partially failing the request, I think it's correct to fail
segment-by-segment to avoid merged request failure affects unrelated
bios.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists