[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 2/2] dm-multipath: reduce memory pressure during requeuing



On Mon, Jan 20 2014 at  7:15am -0500,
Hannes Reinecke <hare suse de> wrote:

> On 01/20/2014 12:59 PM, Junichi Nomura wrote:
> > On 01/17/14 19:42, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> >> @@ -908,19 +910,9 @@ static void multipath_dtr(struct dm_target *ti)
> >>  static int multipath_map(struct dm_target *ti, struct request *clone,
> >>  			 union map_info *map_context)
> >>  {
> >> -	int r;
> >>  	struct multipath *m = (struct multipath *) ti->private;
> >>  
> >> -	if (set_mapinfo(m, map_context) < 0)
> >> -		/* ENOMEM, requeue */
> >> -		return DM_MAPIO_REQUEUE;
> >> -
> >> -	clone->cmd_flags |= REQ_FAILFAST_TRANSPORT;
> >> -	r = map_io(m, clone, map_context);
> >> -	if (r < 0 || r == DM_MAPIO_REQUEUE)
> >> -		clear_mapinfo(m, map_context);
> >> -
> >> -	return r;
> >> +	return map_io(m, clone, map_context);
> >>  }
> > 
> > Now multipath_map() is the only caller of map_io() and
> > most part of multipath_map() is moved to map_io(),
> > there is no reason to separate those functions.
> > You could fold map_io() into multipath_map().
> > 
> Yes, I could.
> 
> However, I didn't do so (for this patchset)
> as this would make reviewing harder.
> 
> But yeah, it should be merged.

Really not that hard to review.  I'd be in favor of folding it in a
revised patch.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]