Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 3 Dec 2008 12:06:16 +0000 | From | Alasdair G Kergon <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] block: fix setting of max_segment_size and seg_boundary mask |
| |
On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 02:32:00PM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 00:42:09 +0100 > Milan Broz <mbroz@redhat.com> wrote:
> > @@ -314,6 +317,7 @@ void blk_queue_stack_limits(struct request_queue *t, struct request_queue *b) > > /* zero is "infinity" */ > > t->max_sectors = min_not_zero(t->max_sectors, b->max_sectors); > > t->max_hw_sectors = min_not_zero(t->max_hw_sectors, b->max_hw_sectors); > > + t->seg_boundary_mask = min_not_zero(t->seg_boundary_mask, b->seg_boundary_mask); > > > > t->max_phys_segments = min(t->max_phys_segments, b->max_phys_segments); > > t->max_hw_segments = min(t->max_hw_segments, b->max_hw_segments);
> Theoretically, blk_queue_stack_limits() better use min_not_zero > instead of min for max_phys_segments, max_hw_segments, and > max_segment_size?
But does zero have any valid use there? We left those alone for now, feeling that BUG_ON() might be more appropriate.
Alasdair -- agk@redhat.com
| |