From: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] blk-mq: make sure elevator callbacks aren't called for passthrough request
Date: Mon, 15 May 2023 14:22:18 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZGKUehOEnKThjFpR@kbusch-mbp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c0c4fc86-29ff-5a70-1f32-dca9af4602d5@acm.org>
On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 08:52:38AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 5/15/23 07:46, Ming Lei wrote:
> > @@ -48,7 +53,7 @@ blk_mq_sched_allow_merge(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq,
> > static inline void blk_mq_sched_completed_request(struct request *rq, u64 now)
> > {
> > - if (rq->rq_flags & RQF_ELV) {
> > + if ((rq->rq_flags & RQF_ELV) && !blk_mq_bypass_sched(rq->cmd_flags)) {
> > struct elevator_queue *e = rq->q->elevator;
> > if (e->type->ops.completed_request)
> > @@ -58,7 +63,7 @@ static inline void blk_mq_sched_completed_request(struct request *rq, u64 now)
> > static inline void blk_mq_sched_requeue_request(struct request *rq)
> > {
> > - if (rq->rq_flags & RQF_ELV) {
> > + if ((rq->rq_flags & RQF_ELV) && !blk_mq_bypass_sched(rq->cmd_flags)) {
> > struct request_queue *q = rq->q;
> > struct elevator_queue *e = q->elevator;
>
> Has it been considered not to set RQF_ELV for passthrough requests instead
> of making the above changes?
That sounds like a good idea. It changes more behavior than what Ming is
targeting here, but after looking through each use for RQF_ELV, I think
not having that set really is the right thing to do in all cases for
passthrough requests.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-15 20:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-15 14:45 [PATCH V2 0/2] blk-mq: handle passthrough request as really passthrough Ming Lei
2023-05-15 14:46 ` [PATCH V2 1/2] blk-mq: don't queue plugged passthrough requests into scheduler Ming Lei
2023-05-16 6:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-16 8:10 ` Ming Lei
2023-05-17 7:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-15 14:46 ` [PATCH V2 2/2] blk-mq: make sure elevator callbacks aren't called for passthrough request Ming Lei
2023-05-15 15:52 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-05-15 20:22 ` Keith Busch [this message]
2023-05-16 1:20 ` Ming Lei
2023-05-16 6:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-16 8:39 ` Ming Lei
2023-05-17 7:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-17 8:58 ` Ming Lei
2023-05-16 14:47 ` Keith Busch
2023-05-17 3:26 ` Ming Lei
2023-05-17 18:13 ` Keith Busch
2023-05-18 1:22 ` Ming Lei
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=ZGKUehOEnKThjFpR@kbusch-mbp \
--to=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--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