On 10/15/21 10:29 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 12:14:19PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> Either way this should be commented as right now it looks pretty >>> arbitrary. >> >> I got rid of this and added a dev_id kind of cookie that gets matched >> on batched addition. > > Thinking about this a bit more. I don't think we need to differenciate > devices, just complete handlers. That is everything using the same > ->complete_batch handler could go onto the same list. Which means > different nvme devices can be polled together. So I think we can > just check the complete/complete_batch handler and be done with it. > The big benefit besides saving a field is that this is pretty much > self-explaining. Good idea, cleaner than a dev_id cookie too. I'll be sending out the revised series soonish, but I incorporated that change. -- Jens Axboe
