[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110330074255.GB17523@htj.dyndns.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:42:55 +0200
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: eliminate ELEVATOR_INSERT_REQUEUE
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 02:25:55PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Btw, is there any need to actually keep the elv_insert interface?
>
> Itw has two callers in current mainline, two of them hardcode
> ELEVATOR_INSERT_REQUEUE as the reason and could opencode it, and
> the other cases could be merged into __elv_add_request.
Agreed, at this point, the function seems a bit pointless.
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