Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 09:31:07 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>, axboe@kernel.dk,
        Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, hch@lst.de,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] scatterlist: cleanup sg_chain() and sg_unmark_end()
Message-ID: <20150611073107.GD1905@lst.de>
References: <20150609162659.21910.41681.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <20150609162715.21910.77696.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <20150610053803.GA1693@gondor.apana.org.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150610053803.GA1693@gondor.apana.org.au>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1010
Lines: 24

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 01:38:04PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 12:27:15PM -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
> >
> > +#define scatterwalk_sg_chain(prv, num, sgl)	sg_chain(prv, num, sgl)
> > +#define scatterwalk_sg_next(sgl)		sg_next(sgl)
> 
> Why are you reintroducing the scatterwalk_sg_next macro that we
> just removed?
> 
> I also don't understand why this is so urgent that it has to go
> into mainline at this late date.

It allows getting a cleaner slate for the next merge window, which seems
useful on it's own.  The re-addition of scatterwalk_sg_next seems next,
but getting rid of the open-coded sg_chain is useful.

Maybe you can take it through the crypto tree and also kill off the
scatterwalk_sg_chain name as well while we're at it?

--
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/