From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-by2nam01on0042.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([104.47.34.42]:14016 "EHLO NAM01-BY2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750791AbdALVQt (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jan 2017 16:16:49 -0500 From: Bart Van Assche To: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "axboe@fb.com" CC: "osandov@osandov.com" Subject: Re: [PATCHSET v6] blk-mq scheduling framework Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 21:16:38 +0000 Message-ID: <1484255784.2720.11.camel@sandisk.com> References: <1484170803-9311-1-git-send-email-axboe@fb.com> In-Reply-To: <1484170803-9311-1-git-send-email-axboe@fb.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 14:39 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > I've reworked bits of this to get rid of the shadow requests, thanks > to Bart for the inspiration. The missing piece, for me, was the fact > that we have the tags->rqs[] indirection array already. I've done this > somewhat differently, though, by having the internal scheduler tag > map be allocated/torn down when an IO scheduler is attached or > detached. This also means that when we run without a scheduler, we > don't have to do double tag allocations, it'll work like before. Hello Jens, Thanks for having done the rework!=A0This series looks great to me. I have = a few small comments though. I will post these as replies to the individual patches. Bart.=