On Mon, May 30 2011 at 10:19pm -0400,
Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>> "Mike" == Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> Mike> blk_queue_nonrot vs blk_queue_non_rotational lends itself to a
> Mike> small amount of confusion.
>
> Yeah, I just didn't feel like mucking with the existing call. But it
> looks like there are only a handful of users.
>
>
> Mike> What about:
> Mike> s/blk_queue_nonrot/blk_queue_non_rotational/
> Mike> s/blk_queue_non_rotational/blk_queue_set_non_rotational/
> Mike> ?
>
> Most of our other block layer calls take the form blk_queue_max_foo()
> for setting foo and {bdev,queue}_max_foo() for querying.
>
> So I guess the most appropriate thing to do would be to do something
> like this?
>
>
> block: Move non-rotational flag to queue limits
>
> To avoid special-casing the non-rotational flag when stacking it is
> moved from the queue flags to be part of the queue limits. This allows
> us to handle it like the remaining I/O topology information.
>
> Also rename blk_queue_nonrot() to be consistent with block layer calling
> conventions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@xxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
