On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 17:46:47 -0500 (EST), Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > if (scsi_status == 0) { > - uptodate = 1; > + error = 0; > } else { > - uptodate = 0; > + error = -EIO; > rq->errors = scsi_status; > } > - end_that_request_first(rq, uptodate, rq->hard_nr_sectors); > - end_that_request_last(rq, uptodate); > + if (__blk_end_request(rq, error, blk_rq_bytes(rq))) > + BUG(); Acked-by: Pete Zaitcev <zaitcev@xxxxxxxxxx> I follow the discussion, actually, and wanted to ask someone to look closer if it's appropriate to use __blk_end_request() here. My understanding was, blk_end_request() is the same thing, only takes the queue lock. But then, should I refactor ub so that it calls __blk_end_request if request function ends with an error and blk_end_request if the end-of-IO even is processed? If not, and the above is sufficient, why have blk_end_request at all? -- Pete -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel