From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request V2 Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:12:25 -0700 Message-ID: <6995c991-65a4-8dca-c36e-fb2eff277ca9@fb.com> References: <1485365126-23210-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <1485455329.2540.7.camel@sandisk.com> <1485456745.2540.9.camel@sandisk.com> <20170126185924.GA25289@lst.de> <71e22257-0592-fdd3-25e5-a78ceced2ab9@sandisk.com> <4054e944-b28d-1cd6-574f-6cd90e28c301@fb.com> <1485464486.2540.12.camel@sandisk.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1485464486.2540.12.camel@sandisk.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com To: Bart Van Assche , "hch@lst.de" Cc: "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "snitzer@redhat.com" , "linux-raid@vger.kernel.org" , "dm-devel@redhat.com" , "j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com" List-Id: dm-devel.ids On 01/26/2017 02:01 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 13:54 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: >> Your call path has blk_get_request() in it, I don't have >> that in my tree. Is it passing in the right mask? > > Hello Jens, > > There is only one blk_get_request() call in drivers/md/dm-mpath.c > and it looks as follows: > > clone = blk_get_request(bdev_get_queue(bdev), > rq->cmd_flags | REQ_NOMERGE, > GFP_ATOMIC); Yeah, I found it in the dm patch. Looks fine to me, since blk_mq_alloc_request() checks for __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM. Weird, it all looks fine to me. Are you sure you tested with the patch? Either that, or I'm smoking crack. -- Jens Axboe From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [dm-devel] split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request V2 To: Bart Van Assche , "hch@lst.de" References: <1485365126-23210-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <1485455329.2540.7.camel@sandisk.com> <1485456745.2540.9.camel@sandisk.com> <20170126185924.GA25289@lst.de> <71e22257-0592-fdd3-25e5-a78ceced2ab9@sandisk.com> <4054e944-b28d-1cd6-574f-6cd90e28c301@fb.com> <1485464486.2540.12.camel@sandisk.com> Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-raid@vger.kernel.org" , "dm-devel@redhat.com" , "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "snitzer@redhat.com" , "j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com" From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <6995c991-65a4-8dca-c36e-fb2eff277ca9@fb.com> Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:12:25 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1485464486.2540.12.camel@sandisk.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 List-ID: On 01/26/2017 02:01 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 13:54 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: >> Your call path has blk_get_request() in it, I don't have >> that in my tree. Is it passing in the right mask? > > Hello Jens, > > There is only one blk_get_request() call in drivers/md/dm-mpath.c > and it looks as follows: > > clone = blk_get_request(bdev_get_queue(bdev), > rq->cmd_flags | REQ_NOMERGE, > GFP_ATOMIC); Yeah, I found it in the dm patch. Looks fine to me, since blk_mq_alloc_request() checks for __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM. Weird, it all looks fine to me. Are you sure you tested with the patch? Either that, or I'm smoking crack. -- Jens Axboe