<sys/bio.h>.
<sys/bio.h> is now a prerequisite for <sys/buf.h> but it shall
not be made a nested include according to bdes teachings on the
subject of nested includes.
Diskdrivers and similar stuff below specfs::strategy() should no
longer need to include <sys/buf.> unless they need caching of data.
Still a few bogus uses of struct buf to track down.
Repocopy by: peter
Exceptions:
Vinum untouched. This means that it cannot be compiled.
Greg Lehey is on the case.
CCD not converted yet, casts to struct buf (still safe)
atapi-cd casts to struct buf to examine B_PHYS
(Much of this done by script)
Move B_ORDERED flag to b_ioflags and call it BIO_ORDERED.
Move b_pblkno and b_iodone_chain to struct bio while we transition, they
will be obsoleted once bio structs chain/stack.
Add bio_queue field for struct bio aware disksort.
Address a lot of stylistic issues brought up by bde.
substitute BUF_WRITE(foo) for VOP_BWRITE(foo->b_vp, foo)
substitute BUF_STRATEGY(foo) for VOP_STRATEGY(foo->b_vp, foo)
This patch is machine generated except for the ccd.c and buf.h parts.
field in struct buf: b_iocmd. The b_iocmd is enforced to have
exactly one bit set.
B_WRITE was bogusly defined as zero giving rise to obvious coding
mistakes.
Also eliminate the redundant struct buf flag B_CALL, it can just
as efficiently be done by comparing b_iodone to NULL.
Should you get a panic or drop into the debugger, complaining about
"b_iocmd", don't continue. It is likely to write on your disk
where it should have been reading.
This change is a step in the direction towards a stackable BIO capability.
A lot of this patch were machine generated (Thanks to style(9) compliance!)
Vinum users: Greg has not had time to test this yet, be careful.
device_add_child_ordered(). 'ivars' may now be set using the
device_set_ivars() function.
This makes it easier for us to change how arbitrary data structures are
associated with a device_t. Eventually we won't be modifying device_t
to add additional pointers for ivars, softc data etc.
Despite my best efforts I've probably forgotten something so let me know
if this breaks anything. I've been running with this change for months
and its been quite involved actually isolating all the changes from
the rest of the local changes in my tree.
Reviewed by: peter, dfr
