Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] block: Introduce elevator features

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2019/08/28 19:43, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> On 28/08/2019 12:41, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> On 2019/08/28 17:16, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>>> What happened to my review comment for v1 of this patch?
>>>
>>
>> I merged the renamed ELEVATOR_F_ZBD_SEQ_WRITE feature into this patch instead of
>> following patch and separated the nullblk and sd_zbc changes into other patches.
>> Well, at least that is what I understood you wanted... Did I misunderstand ?
>> When tired, my english becomes fuzzy sometimes :)
>>
>> Please let me know if that is not what you wanted (it does seem so).
> 
> I meant to useage of an 'unsigned int' vs. explicit u32/u64 for
> 'elevator_features'
> 

I changed from unsigned long to unsigned int, which is always 32bits on any
arch, no ? I preferred the use of unsigned int over u32/u64 as these look more
like low level driver stuff... Did I miss something ?

-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux