On Fri, Jan 27 2017 at 11:36am -0500, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 11:34:34AM -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > Noticed after further review that it seems a bit weird to have the non > > blk-mq support in drivers calling blk_mq_rq_to_pdu(). But I'm not sure > > a blk_rq_to_pdu() macro to blk_mq_rq_to_pdu() is the right thing. What > > do you guys think? > > My first version had an additional name for it, but it caused more > confusion than help. And renaming blk_mq_rq_to_pdu() to blk_rq_to_pdu() tree-wide would be too much churn? I can live with blk_mq_rq_to_pdu(); just figured I'd ask. -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
