Jens Axboe wrote:
>On Fri, Apr 25 2003, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>>Jens Axboe wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Fri, Apr 25 2003, Nick Piggin wrote:
>>>
>>>Exactly, the rest looks ok, the debug trigger is wrong :). The
>>>add_request() strategy is the entry point for all types of requests, not
>>>just blk_fs_request()
>>>
>>>
>>No but it is as_insert_request which is that entry point. It
>>should only calls as_add_request for a blk_fs_request.
>>
>
>Oh I see, yes you are right, I should have looked closer (I just assumed
>it was your elevator_add_req_fn, your naming is a bit funny :)
>
>The debug check is still a bit silly, and there's nothing that stops it
>from being wrong. So I'd still suggest to kill it.
>
Well the debug check is supposed to catch drivers which aren't
behaving nicely or if the reference counting is broken somewhere.
I suppose now that blk_put_request is being used to call
elv_completed_request then it should be pretty safe, right?
So I'll remove the debug stuff then
-
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 : Wed Apr 30 2003 - 22:00:20 EST