Miquel van Smoorenburg <miquels@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 08 Mar 2004 21:19:54, Joe Thornber wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 08:12:18PM +0100, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote: > > > I also wasn't sure how bad it is for md->map to change during > > > dm_request. With your patch, __split_bio() has a pointer to a > > > refcounted copy of the table in ci.map, but multiple calls to > > > __split_bio from the same dm_request could still end up with > > > different maps, which could be bad (I don't know). > > > > No, dm_request() only calls __dm_request() and hence __split_bio() > > once. > > Ofcourse you're right. I was thinking of __map_bio(), which is called > several times, but it doesn't take a table as argument ofcourse. I'll plunk Joe's update to your patch into the next -mm. I'm not testing DM personally, so I'd appreciate it if you could keep an eye on what's happening in there and run regression tests. Thanks.
