From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 10:02:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 10:02:10 -0400 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:39552 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 10:01:56 -0400 Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 07:02:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20010815.070204.39155321.davem@redhat.com> To: axboe@suse.de Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, andrea@suse.de Subject: Re: [patch] zero-bounce highmem I/O From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <20010815151052.C4352@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20010815140740.A4352@suse.de> <20010815.053524.48804759.davem@redhat.com> <20010815151052.C4352@suse.de> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.0 on Emacs 21.0 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Jens Axboe Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 15:10:52 +0200 On Wed, Aug 15 2001, David S. Miller wrote: > The only truly problematic area is the alt_address thing. > It is would be a nice thing to rip this eyesore out of the scsi > layer anyways. The SCSI issue was exactly what was on my mind, and is indeed the reason why I didn't go all the way and did a complete conversion there. The SCSI layer is _not_ very clean in this regard, didn't exactly enjoy this part of the work... I just took a quick look at this, and I think I can make this alt_address thing into a scsi-layer-specific mechanism and thus be able to safely remove it from struct scatterlist. Would you like me to whip up such a set of changes? I'll be more than happy to work on it. > Yep. Want me to add in the x86 parts of your patch? > > Please let me finish up my prototype with sparc64 building and > working, then I'll send you what I have ok? Fine This is forthcoming. Later, David S. Miller davem@redhat.com