On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 01:20:26PM -0600, Dave Kleikamp wrote: > On 11/02/2013 03:50 PM, Dave Kleikamp wrote: > > On 11/01/2013 03:53 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: > > >> So we've three immediate options: > >> > >> 1) You base it on top of the block tree > >> 2) I carry the loop updates > >> 3) You hand Stephen a merge patch for the resulting merge of the two > > > > Attached is a merge patch and the merged loop.c. I'm having problems > > with the loop driver with both the block and my tree. I'll continue to > > look at that, but everything should build cleanly with this. > > Looking back, I obviously rushed the last patch out. This merge patch, > and the resulting loop.c, fix my problem. My code is working with Jens' > block tree now. > > Jens, > I ended up replacing a call to bio_iovec_idx() with __bvec_iter_bvec() > since the former was removed. It's not very elegant, but it works. I'm > open to suggestions on a cleaner fix, but it can wait until one or both > of these trees is merged. No, that's definitely wrong. Read Documentation/block/biovecs.txt - you need to use either the new bio_iovec() or bio_iovec() iter. I can do the conversion later today. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
