Linux-NVME Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Keith Busch <kbusch@meta.com>,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
	axboe@kernel.dk, martin.petersen@oracle.com, jgg@nvidia.com,
	leon@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] blk-mq-dma: bring back p2p request flags
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2025 08:36:51 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aLcBA-Z8yZ44t4ZK@kbusch-mbp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250902053358.GB11204@lst.de>

On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 07:33:58AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2025 at 07:23:07AM -0700, Keith Busch wrote:
> > From: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
> > 
> > We only need to consider data and metadata dma mapping types separately.
> > The request and bio integrity payload have enough flag bits to
> > internally track the mapping type for each. Add flags for these so the
> > caller doesn't need to track them, and provide separete request and
> > integrity helpers to the common code for unmpaping. This will make it
> > easier to scale as new mappings are added without burdening the caller
> > to track such things.
> 
> We are actually about to run out of REQ_* bits with the current
> encoding.  We could shrink the space for REQ_OP_ a bit to create
> more, or try to move some flags out into BIO_ flags (like
> REQ_ALLOC_CACHE) or kill them by looking at pointers instead
> (REQ_INTEGRITY), or by overlaying flags that can't be used with
> the same of (REQ_FUA vs REQ_RAHEAD vs REQ_UNMAP for example).
> And maybe we can come up with a more coherent scheme for
> REQ_PRIO / REQ_BACKGROUND / REQ_SWAP and maybe REQ_IDLE that create
> another priority scheme in addition to the I/O priorities.
 
Sure, but can we do that effort separately from this? I'm mainly trying
to align with Leon's DMA series that adds REQ_MMIO so that we won't have
flag conflicts.


  reply	other threads:[~2025-09-02 21:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-08-29 14:23 [PATCH 0/2] blk-mq-dma: p2p cleanups and integrity fixup Keith Busch
2025-08-29 14:23 ` [PATCH 1/2] blk-integrity: enable p2p source and destination Keith Busch
2025-09-02  5:27   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-29 14:23 ` [PATCH 2/2] blk-mq-dma: bring back p2p request flags Keith Busch
2025-08-29 15:15   ` Keith Busch
2025-09-02  5:33   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-09-02 14:36     ` Keith Busch [this message]
2025-09-02 14:54       ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-09-02 14:57       ` Leon Romanovsky

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=aLcBA-Z8yZ44t4ZK@kbusch-mbp \
    --to=kbusch@kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=kbusch@meta.com \
    --cc=leon@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.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