All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com>
To: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
Cc: dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
	Jun'ichi Nomura <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] dm: only initialize full request_queue for request-based device
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 13:23:12 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BE8DBB0.5060701@ct.jp.nec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1273532139-23043-2-git-send-email-snitzer@redhat.com>

Hi Mike,

On 05/11/2010 07:55 AM +0900, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> Revert back to only allocating a minimalist request_queue structure
> initially (needed for both bio and request-based DM).  Initialization of
> a full request_queue (request_fn, elevator, etc) is deferred until it is
> known that the DM device is request-based.

Thank you for working on this.
However, I still disagree with this patch as we discussed on this thread:
http://marc.info/?t=124990138700003&r=1&w=2
(Exporting a part of queue's features may cause some maintenance costs
 in future.)

As I mentioned on the last email of the thread above (see below),
specifying device type at the device creation time by userspace tools
should make dm code very simple.  So that may be a better approach.

> By the way, another approach to optimizing the memory usage would be
> to determine whether the dm device is bio-based or request-based
> at the device creation time, instead of the table binding time.
> We want the delayed allocation, since kernel can't decide the device
> type until the first table is bound because of the auto-detection
> mechanism.  The auto-detection is good for keeping compatibility with
> existing user-space tools.  But once user-space tools are changed to
> specify device type at the device creation time, we can eventually
> remove the auto-detection.
> Then, kernel can decide device type in alloc_dev(), so
> the initialization code in kernel will become very simple.

Thanks,
Kiyoshi Ueda

  reply	other threads:[~2010-05-11  4:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-05-10 22:55 [RFC PATCH 1/2] block: allow initialization of previously allocated request_queue Mike Snitzer
2010-05-10 22:55 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-05-10 22:55 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] dm: only initialize full request_queue for request-based device Mike Snitzer
2010-05-10 22:55   ` Mike Snitzer
2010-05-11  4:23   ` Kiyoshi Ueda [this message]
2010-05-11 13:15     ` Mike Snitzer
2010-05-12  8:23       ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2010-05-13  3:57         ` Mike Snitzer
2010-05-14  8:06           ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2010-05-14 14:08             ` Mike Snitzer
2010-05-17  9:27               ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2010-05-17 17:27                 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-05-18  8:32                   ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2010-05-18 13:46                     ` Mike Snitzer
2010-05-18 13:46                       ` Mike Snitzer
2010-05-19  5:57                       ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2010-05-19 12:01                         ` Mike Snitzer
2010-05-19 12:01                           ` Mike Snitzer
2010-05-19 14:39                           ` Mike Snitzer
2010-05-19 14:45                             ` Mike Snitzer
2010-05-20 11:21                             ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2010-05-20 17:07                               ` Mike Snitzer
2010-05-21  8:32                                 ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2010-05-21 13:34                                   ` Mike Snitzer
2010-05-24  9:58                                     ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2010-05-19 21:51                           ` Mike Snitzer
2010-05-13  4:31   ` [PATCH 2/2 v2] " Mike Snitzer
2010-05-13  5:02     ` [RFC PATCH 3/2] dm: bio-based device must not register elevator in sysfs Mike Snitzer
2010-05-13 22:14       ` [PATCH 3/2 v2] " Mike Snitzer
2010-05-11  6:55 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] block: allow initialization of previously allocated request_queue Jens Axboe
2010-05-11 13:18   ` Mike Snitzer
2010-05-11 13:21     ` Jens Axboe

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=4BE8DBB0.5060701@ct.jp.nec.com \
    --to=k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=snitzer@redhat.com \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.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.