>>>>> "Tejun" == Tejun Heo <t...@kernel.org> writes:
Tejun> I complained about this in the last posting and in the previous Tejun> patch. Please respond. Martin, are you okay with these Tejun> integrity changes? I missed the first several iterations of all this while I was out on vacation. I'll have to try to wrap my head around the new approach. However, I'm not sure I like the overall approach of the new splitting. Instead of all this cloning, slicing and dicing of bio_vecs I'd rather we bit the bullet and had an offset + length for the vector inside each bio. That way we could keep the bio_vec immutable and make clones more lightweight since their vecs would always point to the parent. This also makes it trivial to split I/Os in the stacking drivers and removes evils in the partial completion code path. It would also allow to sever the ties between "size of block range operated on" vs. bi_size which we need for copy offload, discard, etc. -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
