On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 22:24:32 +0900 Tejun Heo <htejun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > > On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 20:31:38 +0900 > > Tejun Heo <htejun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > >>>> Maybe we need yet another flag indicating padding space > >>>> availability? > >>> How about doing the exact same thing that the drain buffer does? We > >>> can put pre-allocated buffer to a queue and save one sg entry for it. > >> Each sg entry should be aligned so extra sg doesn't really help or am I > >> missing something? > > > > Sorry, please scratch the previous mail. I think that I misunderstood > > what you meant. > > > > The current code does padding only for requests that we call > > __blk_rq_map_user (bio_copy_user) for. You meant that if we create a > > new flag like REQ_NEED_PADDING and set it in blk_rq_map_user, > > blk_rq_map_sg can do padding only when it was set. > > Yeap, that's what I meant. Thanks, I see. Then, I have one question: blk_rq_map_user_iov doesn't padding, thus libata still needs to adjust scatter list, right? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
