From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sagi Grimberg Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/14] block: Replace bi_integrity with bi_special Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 12:19:24 +0300 Message-ID: <53B5201C.9000601@dev.mellanox.co.il> References: <1401334128-15499-1-git-send-email-martin.petersen@oracle.com> <1401334128-15499-3-git-send-email-martin.petersen@oracle.com> <20140611163257.GB28815@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-wg0-f48.google.com ([74.125.82.48]:49092 "EHLO mail-wg0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752960AbaGCJTd (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jul 2014 05:19:33 -0400 Received: by mail-wg0-f48.google.com with SMTP id n12so12363443wgh.31 for ; Thu, 03 Jul 2014 02:19:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: "Martin K. Petersen" , Christoph Hellwig Cc: axboe@fb.com, nab@daterainc.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On 6/12/2014 3:18 AM, Martin K. Petersen wrote: >>>>>> "Christoph" == Christoph Hellwig writes: > Christoph> Instead of having a union of pointer just make it a void > Christoph> pointer. I also think special is a terribly generic name, but > Christoph> I don't really have a better idea at hand. > > I needed something that could encompass additional information to be > passed for integrity, copy offload and discard requests. > > Another option is that we forgo the union name: > > union { > #if defined(CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INTEGRITY) > struct bio_integrity_payload *bi_integrity; > #endif > struct bio_copy *bi_copy; > }; > > That's the way Jens has done it in struct request. I think I like that > better and it doesn't send the same up-for-grabs signal that a void > pointer might. > > Jens: Any preference? > A nameless union makes more sense to me here. Sagi.