On 09/01/2010 03:51 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote: > Could you please document why it is OK to remove 'flush_error' in the > patch header? The -EOPNOTSUPP handling removal (done in patch 2) > obviously helps enable this but it is not clear how the > 'num_flush_requests' flushes that __clone_and_map_flush() generates do > not need explicit DM error handling. Sure, I'll. It's because it now uses the same error handling path in dec_pending() all other bio's use. The flush_error thing was there because flushes got executed/completed in a separate code path to begin with. With the special path gone, there's no need for flush_error path either. Thanks. -- tejun -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
