>The subject looks a bit odd, I think you're trying to say:
>
>"do not add the number of integrity segments to the request twice"
>
>based on the actual patch, is this correct?
>
Yes. I will fix it.
>> +static inline bool blk_integrity_bypass_check(struct request *req,
>> + struct bio *bio)
>> +{
>> + return blk_integrity_rq(req) == 0 && bio_integrity(bio) == NULL;
>> +}
>
>No need for the explicit comparisms, this could just be:
>
> return !blk_integrity_rq(req) && !bio_integrity(bio);
>
>and given that it just has two callers I'm not sure the helper is
>all that useful to start with.
There are many conditional sentences like that, so I left them for unity,
If it's okay to change, I'll do so.
>> +static bool __blk_integrity_mergeable(struct request_queue *q,
>> + struct request *req, struct bio *bio)
>> +{
>> + if (blk_integrity_rq(req) == 0 || bio_integrity(bio) == NULL)
>> + return false;
>> +
>> + if (bio_integrity(req->bio)->bip_flags != bio_integrity(bio)->bip_flags)
>> + return false;
>> +
>> + return true;
>> +}
>> +
>> +bool blk_integrity_mergeable(struct request_queue *q, struct request *req,
>> + struct bio *bio)
>> +{
>> + if (blk_integrity_bypass_check(req, bio))
>> + return true;
>> +
>> + return __blk_integrity_mergeable(q, req, bio);
>> +}
>
>Similarly here, I'm not even sure we need all these helpers. I supect
>the code would become more readable by dropping these helpers and just
>making the checks explicitlẏ
OK. I will drop this.
Best Regards,
Jinyoung.
