[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A0DEA84.6010909@kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 07:19:48 +0900
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Pete Zaitcev <zaitcev@...hat.com>
CC: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
IDE/ATA development list <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>,
Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@...glemail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH block#for-2.6.31 1/3] ub: use __blk_end_request_all()
Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> On Sat, 16 May 2009 00:14:35 +0900, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>> @@ -834,12 +829,7 @@ static void ub_end_rq(struct request *rq
>> error = -EIO;
>> rq->errors = scsi_status;
>> }
>> - rqlen = blk_rq_bytes(rq); /* Oddly enough, this is the residue. */
>> - if (__blk_end_request(rq, error, cmd_len)) {
>> - printk(KERN_WARNING DRV_NAME
>> - ": __blk_end_request blew, %s-cmd total %u rqlen %ld\n",
>> - blk_pc_request(rq)? "pc": "fs", cmd_len, rqlen);
>> - }
>> + __blk_end_request_all(rq, error);
>> }
>
> I applaud this. We needed blk_end_this_mudafakin_request() for a long time.
> Why two underscores?
The ones with two underscores are to be called with queue lock held.
Ones without grab queue lock themselves.
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