Kiyoshi Ueda wrote on Wednesday, December 20, 2006 9:50 AM > On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 14:48:49 +0100, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Big NACK on this - it's not only really ugly, it's also buggy to pass > > interrupt flags as function arguments. As you also mention in the 0/1 > > mail, this also breaks CFQ. > > > > Why do you need in-interrupt request allocation? > > Because I'd like to use blk_get_request() in q->request_fn() > which can be called from interrupt context like below: > scsi_io_completion -> scsi_end_request -> scsi_next_command > -> scsi_run_queue -> blk_run_queue -> q->request_fn > > [ ...] > > Do you think creating another function like blk_get_request_nowait() > is acceptable? You don't need to create another function. blk_get_request already have both wait and nowait semantics via gfp_mask argument. If you can not block, then clear __GFP_WAIT bit in the mask before calling blk_get_request. - Ken -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
