lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jun]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [BIO] request->flags ambiguity
On Fri, Jun 27 2003, Samium Gromoff wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 12:48:22 +0200
> Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de> wrote:
> -- snip --
> > > Is it ok to have a possibility of a request with conflicting
> > > meanings attached to it? For example REQ_CMD | REQ_PM_SHUTDOWN
> > > | REQ_SPECIAL.
> >
> > No of course not.
> -- snip --
> > > Shouldn`t it make more sense to separate request-type-indicator
> > > flags into a separate unambiguous type field, which would take
> > > one of the following values: - read/write request - sense query
> > > - power control - special request
> > >
> > > And not a currently possible combination of all of them, which
> > > seem to be the current situation.
> >
> > There has been talk of that before, search the archives.
>
> Umm, i`ve tried and failed, couldn`t you share some vague
> pointers about the topic or something?

Some pointers here

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=105482104321668&w=2

--
Jens Axboe

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:36    [W:0.032 / U:0.104 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site