On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 05:21:38AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 03:26:46PM -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > +static blk_status_t pmem_do_bvec(struct pmem_device *pmem, struct page *page,
> > + unsigned int len, unsigned int off, unsigned int op,
> > + sector_t sector)
> > +{
> > + if (!op_is_write(op))
> > + return pmem_do_read(pmem, page, off, sector, len);
> > +
> > + return pmem_do_write(pmem, page, off, sector, len);
>
> Why not:
>
> if (op_is_write(op))
> return pmem_do_write(pmem, page, off, sector, len);
> return pmem_do_read(pmem, page, off, sector, len);
>
> that being said I don't see the point of this pmem_do_bvec helper given
> that it only has two callers.
Ok, I am about to post V4 of patches and I got rid of pmem_do_bvec() and
callers are directly calling pmem_do_read()/pmem_do_write().
Vivek
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
