From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0b-00082601.pphosted.com ([67.231.153.30]:46240 "EHLO mx0a-00082601.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753180AbcKDEBi (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Nov 2016 00:01:38 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] blk-mq: immediately dispatch big size request To: Shaohua Li , Christoph Hellwig References: <05e8cb8c7e09903c7db36e81a6bbd0b39b24deff.1478217670.git.shli@fb.com> <6297c9a39cf21c94c65d5a9b3a19e54ba5b8b573.1478217671.git.shli@fb.com> <20161104000954.GA10266@infradead.org> <20161104001353.GA58908@omida-mbp.local.dhcp.thefacebook.com> CC: , , From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <32bef0f6-c194-e31e-3a85-5aa21a6e81a4@fb.com> Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 22:00:58 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20161104001353.GA58908@omida-mbp.local.dhcp.thefacebook.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On 11/03/2016 06:13 PM, Shaohua Li wrote: > On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 05:09:54PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 05:03:54PM -0700, Shaohua Li wrote: >>> This is corresponding part for blk-mq. Disk with multiple hardware >>> queues doesn't need this as we only hold 1 request at most. >> >> Any reason you only do this for the SQ and not the MQ case? > > Right above: > Disk with multiple hardware queues doesn't need this as we only hold 1 > request at most. I've applied 1-2 for 4.10, but we probably should look into unifying those parts of sq and mq in general. For instance, it doesn't seem to make a lot of sense why we'd depth limit sq and not mq. -- Jens Axboe