From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B85DDC433EF for ; Fri, 11 Mar 2022 06:38:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236431AbiCKGjN (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Mar 2022 01:39:13 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52242 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232756AbiCKGjM (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Mar 2022 01:39:12 -0500 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D947D3EF13; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 22:38:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id D09D668AFE; Fri, 11 Mar 2022 07:38:05 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2022 07:38:05 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Kanchan Joshi Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, hch@lst.de, kbusch@kernel.org, asml.silence@gmail.com, io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, sbates@raithlin.com, logang@deltatee.com, pankydev8@gmail.com, javier@javigon.com, mcgrof@kernel.org, a.manzanares@samsung.com, joshiiitr@gmail.com, anuj20.g@samsung.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/17] nvme: modify nvme_alloc_request to take an additional parameter Message-ID: <20220311063805.GB17232@lst.de> References: <20220308152105.309618-1-joshi.k@samsung.com> <20220308152105.309618-5-joshi.k@samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220308152105.309618-5-joshi.k@samsung.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 08:50:52PM +0530, Kanchan Joshi wrote: > From: Keith Busch > > This is a prep patch. It modifies nvme_alloc_request to take an > additional parameter, allowing request flags to be passed. I don't think we need more paramters to nvme_alloc_request. In fact I think we're probably better over removing nvme_alloc_request as a prep cleanup given that is is just two function calls anyway.