I just realized that patch:
--
commit d352ae205d8b05f3f7558d10f474d8436581b3e2
Author: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu Aug 17 16:23:03 2017 -0700
blk-mq: Make blk_mq_reinit_tagset() calls easier to read
Since blk_mq_ops.reinit_request is only called from inside
blk_mq_reinit_tagset(), make this function pointer an argument of
blk_mq_reinit_tagset() instead of a member of struct blk_mq_ops.
This patch does not change any functionality but makes
blk_mq_reinit_tagset() calls easier to read and to analyze.
--
Makes it impossible for me to move controller reset flow to
nvme-core without adding a trampoline (as the reinit_request
is transport specific)...
Hello Sagi,
Sorry but I doubt that that patch makes it "impossible" to move controller
reset flow to the NVMe core. There are already several function pointers in
the nvme_ctrl_ops data structure and there is one such data structure per
transport. Had you already considered to add a function pointer to that
structure?
I have, that's the trampoline function that I was referring to, it feels
a bit funny to have aa nvme core function that would look like:
int nvme_reinit_request()
{
return ctrl->ops->reinit_request()
}
I can easily do that, but doesn't it defeat the purpose
of blk_mq_ops?
