From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F40725D747; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 14:39:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.95.11.211 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706539149; cv=none; b=ohlulNzUiO2V7bHLRFEY6zK5ZZNKyEgzKagKm0eEL3dLIUGlASGHrM5BFIvpTJm+rUhemodxI0i8kPucLAddZ0mZiX0ProeE8KS/96LFvhulevRbAYmlnj7d2DKxbdL+wiiCCW589dYhLN8frK0kUffLugi5JxU+nD2KzhEOj7U= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706539149; c=relaxed/simple; bh=cl20W0OSVEqhA4Wo9siMG+VGLtonLKnMv9sFvFklJ3o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ZezZmybF1Kb9Mmg2KR9KV6zGBlFiClCgC4bKxNK+4AztGLWdaqCdN0QpL1t2t+3VKrwxMQmZJdLPeLF5JMTtULEB5fhxke2e3e9KJxCwMlrftiic10z7rDnXEL3AmENA5GKUrXC9v5NBhIQxjjg1uDmc+QZ72+AShxGWl8oQlXc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lst.de; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.95.11.211 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lst.de Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id BF20468C4E; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 15:39:02 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 15:39:02 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: John Garry Cc: Christoph Hellwig , martin.petersen@oracle.com, Keith Busch , axboe@kernel.dk, sagi@grimberg.me, jejb@linux.ibm.com, djwong@kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org, dchinner@redhat.com, jack@suse.cz, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu, jbongio@google.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, ming.lei@redhat.com, ojaswin@linux.ibm.com, bvanassche@acm.org, Alan Adamson Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 15/15] nvme: Ensure atomic writes will be executed atomically Message-ID: <20240129143902.GA654@lst.de> References: <20240124113841.31824-1-john.g.garry@oracle.com> <20240124113841.31824-16-john.g.garry@oracle.com> <20240129062035.GB19796@lst.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 09:36:38AM +0000, John Garry wrote: > That would probably be in blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list() for block drivers with > .queue_rq set, but I would need to check for a good place for ->queue_rqs . > I can't imagine that we just want to inefficiently iter all rqs at the > ->queue_rqs call point. > > However considering the nature of this change, it is not a good sign that > we/I need to check... I'd be more inclined to leave as is. Heh. At least early on having the checks in one place in nvme makes me feel easier for sure. If we can easily use the block limits for the checks we shouldn't have to keep duplicate values in nvme, though.