Re: [PATCH 13/13] block: don't check for BIO_MAX_PAGES in blk_bio_segment_split()
From: Ming Lei
Date: Tue May 02 2017 - 19:51:18 EST
On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 08:54:55AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Tue, May 02 2017, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 01:42:26PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> >> blk_bio_segment_split() makes sure bios have no more than
> >> BIO_MAX_PAGES entries in the bi_io_vec.
> >> This was done because bio_clone_bioset() (when given a
> >> mempool bioset) could not handle larger io_vecs.
> >> No driver uses bio_clone_bioset() any more, they all
> >> use bio_clone_fast() if anything, and bio_clone_fast()
> >> doesn't clone the bi_io_vec.
> > Maybe in future, some drivers still may try to use
> > bio_clone_bioset() again, I suggest to add some comments
> > on bio_clone_bioset() to make this usage explicitly. Also
> > better to trigger a warning if a big src bio is passed to
> > bio_clone_bioset().
> There are now just two users for bio_clone_bioset(): bounce.c and btrfs.
> Christoph wants to get rid of bounce.c, which would leave one.
> I'd have to drill into the btrfs code to be sure, but it might be that
> btrfs only needs bio_clone_fast(). That would leave zero users.
> Then we wouldn't need a warning at all.
> So I agree that we need to guard against future incorrect usage. I'm not
> yet sure what the best approach is.
I think it is helpful to simply comment this function as obsolete.