Re: [PATCH] REQ-flags to/from BIO-flags bugfix

2007-12-12 Thread David Chinner
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 08:54:07AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 08:18:14AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > I don't know whether BIO_RW_BARRIER is __REQ_SOFTBARRIER or > > __REQ_HARDBARRIER, so I didn't include that in this patch. There also > > doesn't seem to be a __REQ

Re: [PATCH] REQ-flags to/from BIO-flags bugfix

2007-12-12 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 06:06:45PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > Thats not enough You still need to fix code in ll_rw_blk(), I would > define a rq_flags_bio_match_mask = 0xf for that. > (and also add what Jens called "needed" with the > BIO_RW_AHEAD selects REQ_FAILFAST.) Yes, I appreciate it's no

Re: [PATCH] REQ-flags to/from BIO-flags bugfix

2007-12-12 Thread Boaz Harrosh
On Wed, Dec 12 2007 at 17:18 +0200, Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 01:03:10PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote: >> - BIO flags bio->bi_rw and REQ flags req->cmd_flags no longer match. >>Remove comments and do a proper translation between the 2 systems. > > I'd ra

Re: [PATCH] REQ-flags to/from BIO-flags bugfix

2007-12-12 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 08:18:14AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > I don't know whether BIO_RW_BARRIER is __REQ_SOFTBARRIER or > __REQ_HARDBARRIER, so I didn't include that in this patch. There also > doesn't seem to be a __REQ equivalent to BIO_RW_AHEAD, but we can do > the other four bits (and le

Re: [PATCH] REQ-flags to/from BIO-flags bugfix

2007-12-12 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 01:03:10PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > - BIO flags bio->bi_rw and REQ flags req->cmd_flags no longer match. >Remove comments and do a proper translation between the 2 systems. I'd rather see them resynchronised ... in a way that makes it obvious that they should be de