From: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com>
To: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
Damien Le Moal <Damien.LeMoal@wdc.com>,
"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
"axboe@kernel.dk" <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>, "hare@suse.de" <hare@suse.de>,
"MPT-FusionLinux.pdl@broadcom.com"
<MPT-FusionLinux.pdl@broadcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] block: Separate zone requests from medium access requests
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 16:57:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1488301028.2370.7.camel@sandisk.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170228102535.15966-3-damien.lemoal@wdc.com>
On Tue, 2017-02-28 at 19:25 +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> From: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
>=20
> Use blk_rq_accesses_medium() instead of !blk_rq_is_passthrough() to
> ensure that code that is intended for normal medium access requests,
> e.g. DISCARD, READ and WRITE requests, is not applied to
> REQ_OP_ZONE_REPORT requests nor to REQ_OP_ZONE_RESET requests.
> This allows excluding these zone requests from request accounting
> and from request scheduling.
>=20
> Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
Hello Damien,
Since you posted this patch you should have added your Signed-off-by. And
since you have edited this patch, you should have documented what you have
changed.
> static inline void req_set_nomerge(struct request_queue *q, struct reque=
st *req)
> diff --git a/block/elevator.c b/block/elevator.c
> index 699d10f..cbf81c6 100644
> --- a/block/elevator.c
> +++ b/block/elevator.c
> @@ -635,16 +635,20 @@ void __elv_add_request(struct request_queue *q, str=
uct request *rq, int where)
> =20
> rq->q =3D q;
> =20
> - if (rq->rq_flags & RQF_SOFTBARRIER) {
> + if (!blk_rq_accesses_medium(rq)) {
> + /* Do not schedule zone requests */
> + where =3D ELEVATOR_INSERT_FRONT;
> + } if (rq->rq_flags & RQF_SOFTBARRIER) {
This change was not in the patch I sent to you. Additionally, this change
doesn't look properly formatted. Please make sure that the second "if" star=
ts
on a new line.
> }
> } else if (!(rq->rq_flags & RQF_ELVPRIV) &&
> (where =3D=3D ELEVATOR_INSERT_SORT ||
> - where =3D=3D ELEVATOR_INSERT_SORT_MERGE))
> + where =3D=3D ELEVATOR_INSERT_SORT_MERGE)) {
> where =3D ELEVATOR_INSERT_BACK;
> + }
This change wasn't in my patch either. Since this change only adds a pair o=
f
braces, can it be left out?
Thanks,
Bart.=
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com>
To: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
Damien Le Moal <Damien.LeMoal@wdc.com>,
"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
"axboe@kernel.dk" <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>, "hare@suse.de" <hare@suse.de>,
"MPT-FusionLinux.pdl@broadcom.com"
<MPT-FusionLinux.pdl@broadcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] block: Separate zone requests from medium access requests
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 16:57:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1488301028.2370.7.camel@sandisk.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170228102535.15966-3-damien.lemoal@wdc.com>
On Tue, 2017-02-28 at 19:25 +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> From: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
>
> Use blk_rq_accesses_medium() instead of !blk_rq_is_passthrough() to
> ensure that code that is intended for normal medium access requests,
> e.g. DISCARD, READ and WRITE requests, is not applied to
> REQ_OP_ZONE_REPORT requests nor to REQ_OP_ZONE_RESET requests.
> This allows excluding these zone requests from request accounting
> and from request scheduling.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
Hello Damien,
Since you posted this patch you should have added your Signed-off-by. And
since you have edited this patch, you should have documented what you have
changed.
> static inline void req_set_nomerge(struct request_queue *q, struct request *req)
> diff --git a/block/elevator.c b/block/elevator.c
> index 699d10f..cbf81c6 100644
> --- a/block/elevator.c
> +++ b/block/elevator.c
> @@ -635,16 +635,20 @@ void __elv_add_request(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq, int where)
>
> rq->q = q;
>
> - if (rq->rq_flags & RQF_SOFTBARRIER) {
> + if (!blk_rq_accesses_medium(rq)) {
> + /* Do not schedule zone requests */
> + where = ELEVATOR_INSERT_FRONT;
> + } if (rq->rq_flags & RQF_SOFTBARRIER) {
This change was not in the patch I sent to you. Additionally, this change
doesn't look properly formatted. Please make sure that the second "if" starts
on a new line.
> }
> } else if (!(rq->rq_flags & RQF_ELVPRIV) &&
> (where == ELEVATOR_INSERT_SORT ||
> - where == ELEVATOR_INSERT_SORT_MERGE))
> + where == ELEVATOR_INSERT_SORT_MERGE)) {
> where = ELEVATOR_INSERT_BACK;
> + }
This change wasn't in my patch either. Since this change only adds a pair of
braces, can it be left out?
Thanks,
Bart.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-28 16:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-28 10:25 [PATCH 0/3] Separate zone requests from medium access requests Damien Le Moal
2017-02-28 10:25 ` Damien Le Moal
2017-02-28 10:25 ` [PATCH 1/3] block: Introduce blk_rq_accesses_medium() Damien Le Moal
2017-02-28 10:25 ` Damien Le Moal
2017-02-28 10:25 ` [PATCH 2/3] block: Separate zone requests from medium access requests Damien Le Moal
2017-02-28 10:25 ` Damien Le Moal
2017-02-28 16:57 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2017-02-28 16:57 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-03-09 5:27 ` [lkp-robot] [block] 670fcc25d7: kernel_BUG_at_block/blk-core.c kernel test robot
2017-03-09 5:27 ` kernel test robot
2017-02-28 10:25 ` [PATCH 3/3] mpt3sas: Do not check resid for non medium access commands Damien Le Moal
2017-02-28 10:25 ` Damien Le Moal
2017-02-28 16:02 ` [PATCH 0/3] Separate zone requests from medium access requests Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-28 16:16 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-02-28 16:16 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-03-01 2:52 ` Martin K. Petersen
2017-03-01 3:02 ` Damien Le Moal
2017-03-01 3:02 ` Damien Le Moal
2017-03-01 3:21 ` Martin K. Petersen
2017-03-01 9:06 ` Damien Le Moal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1488301028.2370.7.camel@sandisk.com \
--to=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
--cc=Damien.LeMoal@wdc.com \
--cc=MPT-FusionLinux.pdl@broadcom.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.