On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 07:31:21PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 11:06:08PM +0530, Kanchan Joshi wrote: > > Move bio allocation logic from bio_map_user_iov to a new helper > > bio_map_get. It is named so because functionality is opposite of what is > > done inside bio_map_put. This is a prep patch. > > I'm still not a fan of using bio_sets for passthrough and would be > much happier if we could drill down what the problems with the > slab per-cpu allocator are, but it seems like I've lost that fight > against Jens.. > > > +static struct bio *bio_map_get(struct request *rq, unsigned int nr_vecs, > > gfp_t gfp_mask) > > But these names just seems rather misleading. Why not someting > like blk_rq_map_bio_alloc and blk_mq_map_bio_put? Agreed, will rename the alloc and put function in the next iteration > > Not really new in this code but a question to Jens: The existing > bio_map_user_iov has no real upper bounds on the number of bios > allocated, how does that fit with the very limited pool size of > fs_bio_set? -- Anuj Gupta > >
