From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/22] Immutable biovecs, block layer changes Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 07:29:35 -0700 Message-ID: <20130924142935.GA5697@infradead.org> References: <1375912471-5106-1-git-send-email-kmo@daterainc.com> <20130808150954.GA30092@infradead.org> <20130808211529.GB15409@kmo-pixel> <20130924110012.GA7160@infradead.org> <20130924132014.GA16165@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130924132014.GA16165@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mike Snitzer Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Kent Overstreet , axboe@kernel.dk, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 09:20:14AM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote: > Have you been over the patchset? Looks sane to you? I looked over it, although I didn't dig into the details of all driver patches, and I like what I see. As said in the previous mail I'd love to see the patches to shrink struct bio again, too. > Given how disruptive this patchset is to the block layer I'm wondering > how painful this change will be in combination with Jens' blk-mq > changes. I'd prefer to see blk-mq before immutable biovecs; but I have > my own selfish reasons for that. I don't see too much conflicts with blk-multiqueue as that is operating at the request layer. Blk-multiqueue defintively is a higher priority for me, but as it already looks fairly good I have no idea what we're blocked on for it anyway.