From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Moyer Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/16] block: treat DMPG and SWAPIN requests as special Date: Thu, 03 May 2012 10:38:10 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1336054995-22988-1-git-send-email-svenkatr@ti.com> <1336054995-22988-7-git-send-email-svenkatr@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: , , , , , , , , , , To: Venkatraman S Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1336054995-22988-7-git-send-email-svenkatr@ti.com> (Venkatraman S.'s message of "Thu, 3 May 2012 19:53:05 +0530") Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org Venkatraman S writes: > From: Ilan Smith > > When exp_swapin and exp_dmpg are set, treat read requests > marked with DMPG and SWAPIN as high priority and move to > the front of the queue. > [...] > + if (bio_swapin(bio) && blk_queue_exp_swapin(q)) { > + spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock); > + where = ELEVATOR_INSERT_FLUSH; > + goto get_rq; > + } > + > + if (bio_dmpg(bio) && blk_queue_exp_dmpg(q)) { > + spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock); > + where = ELEVATOR_INSERT_FLUSH; > + goto get_rq; Is ELEVATOR_INSERT_FRONT not good enough? It seems wrong to use _FLUSH, here. If the semantics of ELEVATOR_INSERT_FLUSH are really what is required, then perhaps we need to have another think about the naming of these flags. Cheers, Jeff -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org