From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Submit flush requests to the I/O scheduler
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2022 08:41:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220813064142.GA10753@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220812210355.2252143-1-bvanassche@acm.org>
On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 02:03:55PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> When submitting a REQ_OP_WRITE | REQ_FUA request to a zoned storage
> device, these requests must be passed to the (mq-deadline) I/O scheduler
> to ensure that these happen at the write pointer.
Yes.
But maybe I'm stupid, but how is the patch related to fixing that?
blk_mq_plug_issue_direct is called from blk_mq_flush_plug_list for
only the !has_elevator case. How does that change a thing?
Also please include a description of why these changes are otherwise
good and won't regress other cases.
> + blk_mq_sched_insert_request(rq, /*at_head=*/false,
> + /*run_queue=*/last, /*async=*/false);
I find thise comment style very hard to read. Yes, maybe the three
bools here should become flags, but this is even worse than just
passing the arguments.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-13 6:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-12 21:03 [PATCH] block: Submit flush requests to the I/O scheduler Bart Van Assche
2022-08-13 6:41 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2022-08-14 17:13 ` Damien Le Moal
2022-08-14 23:44 ` Bart Van Assche
2022-08-15 9:06 ` Pankaj Raghav
2022-08-15 16:31 ` Damien Le Moal
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=20220813064142.GA10753@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox