>No, I can't prove it. But I can't think of a contrary scenario
>either.
People feel that way about almost every piece of code that
eventually gets an unexpected failure. Lots of code written to
this sort of feeling leads to sporadic difficult to reproduce
failures that may never be traced to its origin.
Look at it this way, with bio_chain you don't even have to
write error branches for it.
Also, if everyone eventually used bio_chain then maybe you
would not have to set aside such large memory reserves, etc., but
that would be in the more distant future.
Anyhow, I can write bio_chain in a separate file without
touching changing any existing code in the kernel, if I am not going
to implement the merge hint. I think I will do just that so that
we have something that we can discuss more concretely.
Adam J. Richter __ ______________ 575 Oroville Road
adam@yggdrasil.com \ / Milpitas, California 95035
+1 408 309-6081 | g g d r a s i l United States of America
"Free Software For The Rest Of Us."
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jun 15 2002 - 22:00:32 EST