From: axboe@kernel.dk (Jens Axboe)
Subject: RFC: struct request cleanups
Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 13:41:40 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55491CF4.6060903@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1429303042-12078-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de>
On 04/17/2015 02:37 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> The first 5 patches move the magic IDE request types into the old IDE
> driver to keep the core block code clean of them. Those are basically
> ready to merge, just like the 6th one which is a cleanup on it's own.
>
> The real RFC is the last one which allocates the block_pc specific
> data separately in the callers instead of bloating every struct
> request with it. I always hated what we did, but with the upcoming
> split of nvme into transports and command sets we'll need a NVME
> equivalent of BLOCK_PC, and as NVMe was designed by crackmonkeys
> dreaming of an ATA controller the "command block" for NVME is even
> bigger than what we have to deal with in SCSI.
>
> Note that the old IDE driver doesn't compile with the last patch
> yet as there are major nightmares to sort out, and BLOCK_PC passthrough
> with dm-multipath doesn't work yet either. If I get some general
> concensus on the approach I'll fix those of course.
These are nice improvements, it'd be great to get rid of embeeding the
command block. I have applied 1-6 for 4.2.
--
Jens Axboe
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC: struct request cleanups
Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 13:41:40 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55491CF4.6060903@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1429303042-12078-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de>
On 04/17/2015 02:37 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> The first 5 patches move the magic IDE request types into the old IDE
> driver to keep the core block code clean of them. Those are basically
> ready to merge, just like the 6th one which is a cleanup on it's own.
>
> The real RFC is the last one which allocates the block_pc specific
> data separately in the callers instead of bloating every struct
> request with it. I always hated what we did, but with the upcoming
> split of nvme into transports and command sets we'll need a NVME
> equivalent of BLOCK_PC, and as NVMe was designed by crackmonkeys
> dreaming of an ATA controller the "command block" for NVME is even
> bigger than what we have to deal with in SCSI.
>
> Note that the old IDE driver doesn't compile with the last patch
> yet as there are major nightmares to sort out, and BLOCK_PC passthrough
> with dm-multipath doesn't work yet either. If I get some general
> concensus on the approach I'll fix those of course.
These are nice improvements, it'd be great to get rid of embeeding the
command block. I have applied 1-6 for 4.2.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-05 19:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-17 20:37 RFC: struct request cleanups Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 20:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 20:37 ` [PATCH 1/7] block: rename REQ_TYPE_SPECIAL to REQ_TYPE_DRV_PRIV Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 20:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 20:37 ` [PATCH 2/7] block: move REQ_TYPE_ATA_TASKFILE and REQ_TYPE_ATA_PC to ide.h Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 20:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 20:37 ` [PATCH 3/7] block: move REQ_TYPE_SENSE to the ide driver Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 20:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 20:37 ` [PATCH 4/7] block: remove REQ_TYPE_PM_SHUTDOWN Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 20:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 20:37 ` [PATCH 5/7] block: move PM request support to IDE Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 20:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 20:37 ` [PATCH 6/7] nbd: stop using req->cmd Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 20:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 20:37 ` [PATCH 7/7] block: allocate block_pc data separate from struct request Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 20:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-05-06 11:46 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-05-06 11:46 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-05-11 8:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-05-11 8:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-21 19:51 ` RFC: struct request cleanups Matthew Wilcox
2015-04-21 19:51 ` Matthew Wilcox
2015-05-05 19:41 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2015-05-05 19:41 ` 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=55491CF4.6060903@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
/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.