Re: [PATCH] block: fix setting of max_segment_size and seg_boundary mask

[Alasdair G Kergon <agk@redhat.com>]

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