From: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ide@vger.kernel.org,
device-mapper development <dm-devel@redhat.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Alasdair G Kergon <agk@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: REQUEST for new 'topology' metrics to be moved out of the 'queue' sysfs directory.
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 22:50:05 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <19014.5501.31618.7897@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: message from Jens Axboe on Friday June 26
On Friday June 26, jens.axboe@oracle.com wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 26 2009, NeilBrown wrote:
> > Do you have a good reason for them going in /queue?
>
> Do you have a good reason for moving them? Im my opinion that makes the
> separation between ->make_request_fn and ->request_fn devices bigger.
Yes, I have a good reason.
Put succinctly: I have a reason for reverting the change to make
/queue visible in md/dm devices: It contains mostly fields that are
irrelevant to those devices.
Given that, I have a reason for moving the new fields: So that can be
visible for md/dm/loop/etc devices.
More verbosely:
Currently (i.e. 2.6.30 and earlier) every block device has a device
directory in /sys/devices. e.g. "sda". It contains attributes that
are generally applicable to any block device (size, ro etc).
Some devices, which use the __make_request driver/layer, have a
'queue' directory with attributes that are specific to the
implementation of __make_request and related code.
Other devices, which make use of the md_make_request driver/layer,
have an 'md' directory with attributes that are specific to that
implementation.
Other devices have no such directory (relevant values are managed
exclusively via ioctls).
We are adding a number of attributes that are generally applicable to
all block devices.
Given the above description of the current state, it seems natural for
the new attributes to go in the device directory -
e.g. sda/new-attribute.
This is exactly what has been done for 'alignment_offset'.
The same should be done for physical_block_size, minimum_io_size, and
optimal_io_size.
Introducing the 'queue' directory - which mostly contains fields
completely irrelevant to non- __make_request drivers - just to store
some values that can easily go elsewhere doesn't seem to make sense to
me.
As for increasing the "separation between ->make_request_fn and
->request_fn devices", I don't think that is a useful way to look at
the devices, as I detail in my other Email.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-27 12:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-25 3:58 REQUEST for new 'topology' metrics to be moved out of the 'queue' sysfs directory Neil Brown
2009-06-25 8:00 ` Martin K. Petersen
2009-06-25 11:07 ` [dm-devel] " NeilBrown
2009-06-25 11:36 ` John Robinson
2009-06-25 17:43 ` Martin K. Petersen
2009-06-25 12:17 ` berthiaume_wayne
2009-06-25 17:38 ` Martin K. Petersen
2009-06-25 17:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-25 19:34 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-26 11:58 ` [dm-devel] " Neil Brown
2009-06-26 14:48 ` Martin K. Petersen
2009-07-07 1:47 ` [dm-devel] " Neil Brown
2009-07-07 5:29 ` Martin K. Petersen
2009-07-09 0:42 ` Neil Brown
2009-07-07 22:06 ` Bill Davidsen
2009-06-25 19:40 ` [dm-devel] " Jens Axboe
2009-06-26 12:41 ` Neil Brown
2009-06-26 12:50 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-26 13:16 ` NeilBrown
2009-06-26 13:27 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-26 13:41 ` NeilBrown
2009-06-26 13:49 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-27 12:50 ` Neil Brown [this message]
2009-06-26 13:23 ` NeilBrown
2009-06-26 13:29 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-27 12:32 ` Neil Brown
2009-06-29 10:18 ` [dm-devel] " Jens Axboe
2009-06-29 10:52 ` NeilBrown
2009-06-29 11:41 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-29 12:45 ` Boaz Harrosh
2009-06-29 12:52 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-29 23:09 ` Andreas Dilger
2009-07-01 0:29 ` Neil Brown
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=19014.5501.31618.7897@notabene.brown \
--to=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=agk@redhat.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=snitzer@redhat.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).