[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 04/13] block: Add bio_clone_kmalloc()
- From: Kent Overstreet <koverstreet google com>
- To: Tejun Heo <tj kernel org>
- Cc: axboe kernel dk, dm-devel redhat com, linux-kernel vger kernel org, linux-bcache vger kernel org, sage newdream net, linux-fsdevel vger kernel org, yehuda hq newdream net, agk redhat com
- Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 04/13] block: Add bio_clone_kmalloc()
- Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 13:39:32 -0700
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 09:09:03AM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 10:59:51PM -0400, koverstreet google com wrote:
> > @@ -729,7 +729,7 @@ static struct bio *bio_chain_clone(struct bio **old, struct bio **next,
> > }
> >
> > while (old_chain && (total < len)) {
> > - tmp = bio_kmalloc(gfpmask, old_chain->bi_max_vecs);
> > + tmp = bio_clone_kmalloc(old_chain, gfpmask);
> > if (!tmp)
> > goto err_out;
> >
> > @@ -751,13 +751,9 @@ static struct bio *bio_chain_clone(struct bio **old, struct bio **next,
> > if (!bp)
> > goto err_out;
> >
> > - __bio_clone(tmp, &bp->bio1);
> > -
>
> This effectively swaps the order of bio_split() and __bio_clone(). Is
> that safe? Also, please cc the maintainer.
Now that I look at that code some more, I'm not sure it was quite right
before - that or I don't follow how it's supposed to work.
That bio_split() effectively does its own clone, so it seems to me the
bio_kmalloc()/bio_clone_kmalloc() should only be happening in the non
split case.
Also, there's a bio_chain_clone in drivers/block/osdblk.c that looks
like it's doing something similar, probably we should have some generic
code for this.
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]