On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 09:13:34AM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 10:59:52PM -0400, koverstreet@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > diff --git a/fs/bio.c b/fs/bio.c
> > index e2c0970..de0733e 100644
> > --- a/fs/bio.c
> > +++ b/fs/bio.c
> > @@ -435,8 +435,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(bio_phys_segments);
> > */
> > void __bio_clone(struct bio *bio, struct bio *bio_src)
> > {
> > - memcpy(bio->bi_io_vec, bio_src->bi_io_vec,
> > - bio_src->bi_max_vecs * sizeof(struct bio_vec));
> > + memcpy(bio->bi_io_vec,
> > + bio_iovec(bio_src),
>
> Unnecessary line break.
>
> > + bio_segments(bio_src) * sizeof(struct bio_vec));
> >
> > /*
> > * most users will be overriding ->bi_bdev with a new target,
> > @@ -445,10 +446,10 @@ void __bio_clone(struct bio *bio, struct bio *bio_src)
> > bio->bi_sector = bio_src->bi_sector;
> > bio->bi_bdev = bio_src->bi_bdev;
> > bio->bi_flags |= 1 << BIO_CLONED;
> > + bio->bi_flags &= ~(1 << BIO_SEG_VALID);
>
> Can probably be conditionalized on bi_idx?
I've never been that clear on the semantics of BIO_SEG_VALID. I'll defer
to you on that.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bcache" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
