From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <axboe@kernel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cfq: priority boost on meta/prio marked IO
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
References: <20160608204347.GA30146@kernel.dk>
 <x4937omxd9u.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
 <5759E177.9040307@kernel.dk> <5759E299.2060200@kernel.dk>
 <x49mvmuvx2n.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>, linux-block@vger.kernel.org
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Message-ID: <5759E820.1010609@kernel.dk>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 16:05:20 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <x49mvmuvx2n.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
List-ID: <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>

On 06/09/2016 04:04 PM, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> writes:
>
>>> I went and checked, but I don't see it. Where is this?
>>
>> Ah now I see, you're looking at current -git. The patch is against
>> for-4.8/core.
>
> Ah, right, Mike's patches went in.
>
>> Updated version below, dropping REQ_META and changing the naming
>> s/meta/prio.
>>
>> diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
>> index 32a283eb7274..3cfd67d006fb 100644
>> --- a/block/blk-core.c
>> +++ b/block/blk-core.c
>> @@ -1781,6 +1781,11 @@ get_rq:
>>   		rw_flags |= REQ_SYNC;
>>
>>   	/*
>> +	 * Add in META/PRIO flags, if set, before we get to the IO scheduler
>> +	 */
>> +	rw_flags |= (bio->bi_rw & (REQ_META | REQ_PRIO));
>> +
>> +	/*
>
> Do we still need to pass in META here?

We don't have to, but it doesn't really hurt. Frankly, we should pass in 
the whole damn thing.

-- 
Jens Axboe