Re: [PATCH 2/2] nvme: blk_rq_dma_map_iter_next is no longer using iova state

[Nitesh Shetty <nj.shetty@samsung.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1083 bytes --]

On 12/01/26 03:08PM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>On 1/12/26 14:57, Nitesh Shetty wrote:
>> DMA IOVA state is not used inside blk_rq_dma_map_iter_next
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nitesh Shetty <nj.shetty@samsung.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/nvme/host/pci.c | 5 ++---
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c b/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
>> index 3b528369f5454..065555576d2f9 100644
>> --- a/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
>> +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
>> @@ -823,7 +823,7 @@ static bool nvme_pci_prp_iter_next(struct request *req, struct device *dma_dev,
>>
>>  	if (iter->len)
>>  		return true;
>> -	if (!blk_rq_dma_map_iter_next(req, dma_dev, &iod->dma_state, iter))
>> +	if (!blk_rq_dma_map_iter_next(req, dma_dev, iter))
>
>Hu... Why is this not squashed with the previous patch ? If only patch 1 is
>applied, this will not compile, right ?
>
I couldn’t decide whether to use the layering convention or a unified patch,
so I chose one patch per layer.
Agreed, independently this doesn't compile, merging make sense.
I will resend.

Thanks,
Nitesh

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 0 bytes --]