On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 03:25:15PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:

On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 03:08:30PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:

quoted

@@ -422,7 +409,11 @@ void bio_put(struct bio *bio)
 	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&bio->bi_cnt)) {
 		bio_disassociate_task(bio);
 		bio->bi_next = NULL;
-		bio->bi_destructor(bio);
+
+		if (bio->bi_pool)
+			bio_free(bio, bio->bi_pool);
+		else
+			bio->bi_destructor(bio);

So, this bi_pool overriding caller specified custom bi_destructor is
rather unusual.  I know why it's like that - the patch series is
gradually replacing bi_destructor with bi_pool and removes
bi_destructor eventually, but it would be far better if at least patch
description says why this is unusual like this.

Ok, I'll stick a comment in there:

	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&bio->bi_cnt)) {
		bio_disassociate_task(bio);
		bio->bi_next = NULL;

		/*
		 * This if statement is temporary - bi_pool is replacing
		 * bi_destructor, but bi_destructor will be taken out in another
		 * patch.
		 */
		if (bio->bi_pool)
			bio_free(bio, bio->bi_pool);
		else
			bio->bi_destructor(bio);
	}

Thanks.

-- 
tejun