From: merez@codeaurora.org
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
Cc: merez@codeaurora.org, linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
DOCUMENTATION <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] block: Add test-iosched scheduler
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 23:22:42 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9b1f5eadae482d6c6e9fe390d1fec040.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <x498vfsi8zp.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
On Tue, June 12, 2012 1:13 pm, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> merez@codeaurora.org writes:
>
>> On Tue, June 12, 2012 7:09 am, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>>> Maya Erez <merez@codeaurora.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> The test scheduler allows testing a block device by dispatching
>>>> specific requests according to the test case and declare PASS/FAIL
>>>> according to the requests completion error code
>>>
>>> What sort of tests have you written that make use of this
>>> infrastructure?
>>>
>>>> @@ -1072,8 +1072,6 @@ struct request *blk_get_request(struct
>>>> request_queue *q, int rw, gfp_t gfp_mask)
>>>> {
>>>> struct request *rq;
>>>>
>>>> - BUG_ON(rw != READ && rw != WRITE);
>>>> -
>>>
>>> Please explain this.
>> get_request and get_request_wait, called by blk_get_request, expects to
>> get the REQ_SYNC flag in addition to the read/write flag. Moreover, it
>> uses the REQ_SYNC flag in its algorithm decision making.
>> However blk_get_request expects to get a Boolean to indicate only
>> read/write flag and cannot handle the REQ_SYNC flag.
>
> Right, so why is it okay to change this? Right now, blk_get_request is
> used for block special requests. There is no sense of sync vs. async
> for such requests (that's an fs request notion). Perhaps you're calling
> the wrong function?
>
> Cheers,
> Jeff
>
I use this function to get a WRITE_FLUSH request (which includes in its
flags the REQ_SYNC flag).
Is there another function I should use for this purpose?
Thanks,
Maya
--
Sent by consultant of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-13 6:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-12 9:06 [PATCH v4 0/1] block: Add test-iosched scheduler Maya Erez
2012-06-12 9:06 ` [PATCH v4 1/1] " Maya Erez
2012-06-12 14:09 ` Jeff Moyer
2012-06-12 19:58 ` merez
2012-06-12 20:13 ` Jeff Moyer
2012-06-13 6:22 ` merez [this message]
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=9b1f5eadae482d6c6e9fe390d1fec040.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org \
--to=merez@codeaurora.org \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).