Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1579792

Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] block: introduce bio_clone_bioset_partial()

From Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] block: introduce bio_clone_bioset_partial()
Date 2017-02-13 14:50 +0100
Message-ID <tapaV-4mz-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <t9h5M-2lX-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <t9h5M-2lX-27@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 06:56:13PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> md still need bio clone(not the fast version) for behind write,
> and it is more efficient to use bio_clone_bioset_partial().
> 
> The idea is simple and just copy the bvecs range specified from
> parameters.

Given how few users bio_clone_bioset has I wonder if we shouldn't
simply add the two new arguments to it instead of adding another
indirection.

Otherwise looks fine:

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH v1 1/5] block: introduce bio_clone_bioset_partial() Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 12:00 +0100
  Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] block: introduce bio_clone_bioset_partial() Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> - 2017-02-13 14:50 +0100
    Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] block: introduce bio_clone_bioset_partial() Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 02:10 +0100
      Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] block: introduce bio_clone_bioset_partial() Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> - 2017-02-14 17:10 +0100
        Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] block: introduce bio_clone_bioset_partial() Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 03:30 +0100

csiph-web