Matthew,
>> Since most of the changes are in scsi or target, should I take this
>> series through my tree?
>
> I'd welcome that. Nick seems to be inactive as target maintainer;
> his tree on kernel.org hasn't seen any updates in five months.
Applied to 4.19/scsi-queue, thanks!
--
Martin K. P
Btw, if you are on a spree to remove almost unused data structures
from target code, the lib/btree.c code is only used by the qla2xxx
target code, and doesn't really look like the best fit for it either.
___
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@list
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 10:06:58PM -0400, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>
> Matthew,
>
> > Removing the percpu_ida code nets over 400 lines of removal. It's not
> > as spectacular as deleting an entire architecture, but it's still a
> > worthy reduction in lines of code.
>
> Since most of the chang
Matthew,
> Removing the percpu_ida code nets over 400 lines of removal. It's not
> as spectacular as deleting an entire architecture, but it's still a
> worthy reduction in lines of code.
Since most of the changes are in scsi or target, should I take this
series through my tree?
--
Martin K.
On 6/12/18 1:05 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> Removing the percpu_ida code nets over 400 lines of removal. It's not
> as spectacular as deleting an entire architecture, but it's still a
> worthy reduction in lines of code.
>
> Untested due to lack of hardware and not understanding how to set up a
>
On Tue, 2018-06-12 at 12:05 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> Removing the percpu_ida code nets over 400 lines of removal. It's not
> as spectacular as deleting an entire architecture, but it's still a
> worthy reduction in lines of code.
>
> Untested due to lack of hardware and not understanding ho
