[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120828220532.GB1048@moria.home.lan>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 15:05:32 -0700
From: Kent Overstreet <koverstreet@...gle.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dm-devel@...hat.com, vgoyal@...hat.com, mpatocka@...hat.com,
bharrosh@...asas.com, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>, Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 7/9] block: Add bio_clone_bioset(), bio_clone_kmalloc()
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 01:44:01PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 10:37:34AM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > +static inline struct bio *bio_clone(struct bio *bio, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> > +{
> > + return bio_clone_bioset(bio, gfp_mask, fs_bio_set);
> > +}
> > +
> ...
> > +static inline struct bio *bio_clone_kmalloc(struct bio *bio, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> > +{
> > + return bio_clone_bioset(bio, gfp_mask, NULL);
> > +
> > +}
>
> Do we really need these wrappers? I'd prefer requiring users to
> explicit choose @bioset when cloning.
bio_clone() is an existing api, I agree but I'd prefer to convert
existing users in a separate patch and when I do that I want to spend
some time actually looking at the existing code instead of doing the
conversion blindly (at least some of the existing users are incorrect
and I'll have to add bio_sets for them).
--
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