From: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>, Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@gmail.com>,
linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Remove un-needed 'major' registration when alloc_disk(0) is used.
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 17:20:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56E8A6BF.7060304@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <878u1jgzgi.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>
On 03/15/2016 03:15 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15 2016, Ross Zwisler wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 08:59:28AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
>>> When alloc_disk(0) is used, the ->major number is ignored and
>>> irrelevant. Yet several drivers register a major number anyway.
>>>
>>> This series of patches removes the pointless registrations. The pmem
>>> driver also does this, but a patch has already been sent for that
>>> driver.
>>>
>>> Note that I am not in a position to test these beyond simple compile
>>> testing.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> NeilBrown
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> NeilBrown (4):
>>> nvdimm/blk: don't allocate unused major device number
>>> nvdimm/btt: don't allocate unused major device number
>>> memstick: don't allocate unused major for ms_block
>>> NVMe: don't allocate unused nvme_major
>>>
>>>
>>> drivers/memstick/core/ms_block.c | 17 ++---------------
>>> drivers/nvdimm/blk.c | 18 +-----------------
>>> drivers/nvdimm/btt.c | 19 ++-----------------
>>> drivers/nvme/host/core.c | 16 +---------------
>>> 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 64 deletions(-)
>>
>> There are several other drivers that allocate a major, but then use it for
>> some small number of minors (1 for null_blk.c and 16 for virtio_blk.c). They
>> both have GENHD_FL_EXT_DEVT set, so I think what happens is that after we
>> exhaust the allocated minors they hop over to having BLOCK_EXT_MAJOR as a
>> major and a dynamically assigned minor.
>
> null_blk looks like it would be safe to convert - it is just used for
> testing. Jens Axboe would probably know for sure.
>
> virtio_blk is a much older and there may will be code which has some
> sort of expectations about minor numbers. I think it would not be worth
> the risks to change it.
Agree on both - null_blk can be trivially converted, and I too would be
worried about virt_blkio changes breaking existing assumptions.
--
Jens Axboe
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: axboe@fb.com (Jens Axboe)
Subject: [PATCH 0/4] Remove un-needed 'major' registration when alloc_disk(0) is used.
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 17:20:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56E8A6BF.7060304@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <878u1jgzgi.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>
On 03/15/2016 03:15 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15 2016, Ross Zwisler wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016@08:59:28AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
>>> When alloc_disk(0) is used, the ->major number is ignored and
>>> irrelevant. Yet several drivers register a major number anyway.
>>>
>>> This series of patches removes the pointless registrations. The pmem
>>> driver also does this, but a patch has already been sent for that
>>> driver.
>>>
>>> Note that I am not in a position to test these beyond simple compile
>>> testing.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> NeilBrown
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> NeilBrown (4):
>>> nvdimm/blk: don't allocate unused major device number
>>> nvdimm/btt: don't allocate unused major device number
>>> memstick: don't allocate unused major for ms_block
>>> NVMe: don't allocate unused nvme_major
>>>
>>>
>>> drivers/memstick/core/ms_block.c | 17 ++---------------
>>> drivers/nvdimm/blk.c | 18 +-----------------
>>> drivers/nvdimm/btt.c | 19 ++-----------------
>>> drivers/nvme/host/core.c | 16 +---------------
>>> 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 64 deletions(-)
>>
>> There are several other drivers that allocate a major, but then use it for
>> some small number of minors (1 for null_blk.c and 16 for virtio_blk.c). They
>> both have GENHD_FL_EXT_DEVT set, so I think what happens is that after we
>> exhaust the allocated minors they hop over to having BLOCK_EXT_MAJOR as a
>> major and a dynamically assigned minor.
>
> null_blk looks like it would be safe to convert - it is just used for
> testing. Jens Axboe would probably know for sure.
>
> virtio_blk is a much older and there may will be code which has some
> sort of expectations about minor numbers. I think it would not be worth
> the risks to change it.
Agree on both - null_blk can be trivially converted, and I too would be
worried about virt_blkio changes breaking existing assumptions.
--
Jens Axboe
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>, Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>,
Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@gmail.com>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
<linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Remove un-needed 'major' registration when alloc_disk(0) is used.
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 17:20:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56E8A6BF.7060304@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <878u1jgzgi.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>
On 03/15/2016 03:15 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15 2016, Ross Zwisler wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 08:59:28AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
>>> When alloc_disk(0) is used, the ->major number is ignored and
>>> irrelevant. Yet several drivers register a major number anyway.
>>>
>>> This series of patches removes the pointless registrations. The pmem
>>> driver also does this, but a patch has already been sent for that
>>> driver.
>>>
>>> Note that I am not in a position to test these beyond simple compile
>>> testing.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> NeilBrown
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> NeilBrown (4):
>>> nvdimm/blk: don't allocate unused major device number
>>> nvdimm/btt: don't allocate unused major device number
>>> memstick: don't allocate unused major for ms_block
>>> NVMe: don't allocate unused nvme_major
>>>
>>>
>>> drivers/memstick/core/ms_block.c | 17 ++---------------
>>> drivers/nvdimm/blk.c | 18 +-----------------
>>> drivers/nvdimm/btt.c | 19 ++-----------------
>>> drivers/nvme/host/core.c | 16 +---------------
>>> 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 64 deletions(-)
>>
>> There are several other drivers that allocate a major, but then use it for
>> some small number of minors (1 for null_blk.c and 16 for virtio_blk.c). They
>> both have GENHD_FL_EXT_DEVT set, so I think what happens is that after we
>> exhaust the allocated minors they hop over to having BLOCK_EXT_MAJOR as a
>> major and a dynamically assigned minor.
>
> null_blk looks like it would be safe to convert - it is just used for
> testing. Jens Axboe would probably know for sure.
>
> virtio_blk is a much older and there may will be code which has some
> sort of expectations about minor numbers. I think it would not be worth
> the risks to change it.
Agree on both - null_blk can be trivially converted, and I too would be
worried about virt_blkio changes breaking existing assumptions.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-16 0:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-09 21:59 [PATCH 0/4] Remove un-needed 'major' registration when alloc_disk(0) is used NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` [PATCH 3/4] memstick: don't allocate unused major for ms_block NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-10 9:06 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-10 9:06 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-10 9:06 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-09 21:59 ` [PATCH 1/4] nvdimm/blk: don't allocate unused major device number NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-10 9:05 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-10 9:05 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-10 9:05 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-09 21:59 ` [PATCH 2/4] nvdimm/btt: " NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-10 9:05 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-10 9:05 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-10 9:05 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-09 21:59 ` [PATCH 4/4] NVMe: don't allocate unused nvme_major NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-10 9:06 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-10 9:06 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-10 9:06 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-09 23:35 ` [PATCH 0/4] Remove un-needed 'major' registration when alloc_disk(0) is used Dan Williams
2016-03-09 23:35 ` Dan Williams
2016-03-09 23:35 ` Dan Williams
2016-03-14 22:50 ` Ross Zwisler
2016-03-14 22:50 ` Ross Zwisler
2016-03-14 22:50 ` Ross Zwisler
2016-03-15 22:15 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-15 22:15 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-15 22:15 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-16 0:20 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2016-03-16 0:20 ` Jens Axboe
2016-03-16 0:20 ` 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=56E8A6BF.7060304@fb.com \
--to=axboe@fb.com \
--cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=maximlevitsky@gmail.com \
--cc=neilb@suse.com \
--cc=ross.zwisler@linux.intel.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.