From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Alasdair G Kergon <agk@redhat.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
device-mapper development <dm-devel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] REQUEST for new 'topology' metrics to be moved out of the 'queue' sysfs directory.
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:18:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090629101841.GF23611@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19014.4447.248248.63960@notabene.brown>
On Sat, Jun 27 2009, Neil Brown wrote:
> > There's no such thing as first or second class block devices. The fact
> > that drivers using ->make_request_fn directly do not utilize the full
> > scope of the queue isn't a very interesting fact, imho.
>
> Your phrase "drivers using ->make_request_fn directly" seems to
> suggest you are looking at things very differently to me.
>
> From my perspective, all drivers use ->make_request_fn equally.
> Some set it to "__make_request", some to "md_make_request", others to
> "dm_request" or "loop_make_request" etc.
Neil, will you please stop these silly games. Stop trying to invent
differences based on interpretations of what you read into my replies.
> Each of these different drivers need some private storage.
> __make_request uses struct request_queue
> md_make_request uses struct mddev_s
> dm_request uses struct mapped_device
> loop_make_request uses struct loop_device
> etc
>
> These structures are all attached to gendisk one way or another.
>
> Of these examples, the first three have an extra level. They are
> intermediaries or "midlayers" for multiple drivers and perform some
> processing before passing the request down.
> __make_request provides this for ide and scsi (etc) via ->request_fn and
> ->queuedata in struct request_queue (and other fields).
> md_make_request provides this for raid1 and raid5 (etc) via
> ->pers->make_request and ->private is struct mddev_s (and other
> fields).
> dm_request provides this for crypt and multipath (etc) via
> ->map->targets[]->type->map and ->map->targets[]->private (and
> other fields).
Nothing - I repeat nothing - stops md/dm from removing that layer. It's
a layer they imposed themselves based on the design they chose to
implement internally. It has NOTHING to do with how the block layer is
designed. If md raid1 assigned raid1_dev (or whatever raid1 uses a its
device identifier structure) to ->queuedata, and had an mddev_s in its
raid1 structure, that would be a perfectly viable design as well.
Loop does that. md/dm have their own internal layering, if anything is a
"midlayer" (to keep to the apparent theme of design patterns), it's the
code md and dm bits.
> Looked at from this perspective, the fact that some drivers 'do not
> utilise the full scope of the queue' certainly isn't the interesting
> point. The interesting point is that they have to use parts of the
> queue at all.
>
> And from this perspective, __make_request is a class above everything
> else. __make_request gets a dedicate field in gendisk (->queue) and
> every driver has to provide a queue. Other (lower class) drivers get
> to share gendisk->private_date and/or gendisk->queue->queuedata.
That's just utter nonsense.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-29 10:18 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
2009-06-26 13:23 ` [dm-devel] " NeilBrown
2009-06-26 13:29 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-27 12:32 ` Neil Brown
2009-06-29 10:18 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2009-06-29 10:52 ` [dm-devel] " 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=20090629101841.GF23611@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=agk@redhat.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.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=neilb@suse.de \
--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).