On 11/14/18 9:02 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Hi Jens, > > this series removes another bunch of legacy request leftovers, > including the pointer indirection for the queue_lock. Applied, with the subname part removed as mentioned in #13. > Note that we have very few queue_lock users left, I wonder if > we should get rid of it entirely and have separate locks for > the cgroup and I/O scheduler code, which are the only heavy > users? Probably not worth it... -- Jens Axboe
