[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5af54574-2c28-dc6f-7205-cb3c3575c93b@huaweicloud.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2025 09:15:34 +0800
From: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>
Cc: colyli@...nel.org, hare@...e.de, tieren@...as.com, axboe@...nel.dk,
tj@...nel.org, josef@...icpanda.com, song@...nel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, neil@...wn.name, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, yi.zhang@...wei.com, yangerkun@...wei.com,
johnny.chenyi@...wei.com, "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 5/7] md/raid5: convert to use bio_submit_split()
Hi,
在 2025/08/25 19:00, Christoph Hellwig 写道:
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2025 at 05:36:58PM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote:
>> + raid_bio = bio_submit_split(raid_bio, sectors,
>> + &conf->bio_split);
>> + if (!raid_bio)
>> + return NULL;
>> +
>> + raid_bio->bi_opf &= ~REQ_NOMERGE;
>
> It almost feels as if md wants a little helper that wraps
> bio_submit_split and also clears REQ_NOMERGE?
>
Yes.
And with the respect bio_submit_split() set this flag and then we clear
it, will it make more sense to set this flag after bio_submit_split()
from block layer?
Thanks,
Kuai
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists