From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 1 May 2002 15:08:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 1 May 2002 15:08:45 -0400 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:7950 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 1 May 2002 15:08:45 -0400 Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 21:08:32 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Martin Dalecki Cc: Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH] reworked IDE/general tagged command queueing Message-ID: <20020501190832.GK811@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20020501123705.GI837@suse.de> <3CD0165D.6090901@evision-ventures.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 01 2002, Martin Dalecki wrote: > U?ytkownik Jens Axboe napisa?: > >Hi, > > > >I've rewritten parts of the IDE TCQ stuff to be, well, a lot better in > >my oppinion. I had to accept that the ata_request and rq->special usage > >sucked, it was just one big mess. > > > >So following a suggestion from Martin and Linus, I implemented some > >basic tagged command queueing back end in the block layer. This is what > >the new IDE TCQ core is build on, and what potentially others can use as > >well. I'll start by describing the new API: > > > Looking at the IDE part we can now see that pushing the > generic functions one level up the impact on the code flow > on the IDE side is now: > > 1. Low (most of stuff is due to the ugly /proc special-ide-interface. > > 2. Nicely isolated. > > Great work Jens! (just my humble opinnion). Thanks! > However I see a note about the need > to unify the DMA parts, so I will se what can be done on this > side becouse I have always planned to get rid of the > silly switch(ide_dma_function_t) on the dmaproc-path. I'll try and get some work done on that tomorrow, right now the dmaproc crap is a garbage bin of stuff rolled into one. > May I ask you as well to just call ide-tcq.c simple tcq.c? > The ide- is entierly redundant and I see no need to stick > to the previous "convention" here. It is just a leftover from > the days where the IDE stuff didn't sit in his own directory. > In general I rather prefer the prefix ata_ instead of ide_ becouse > we are on the command level and on the host here - > ide resides on the disk and the whole world > outside linux calls it ata_. Finally ata_ is far better > grep-able overall becouse the ide letter combination is very > common :-) But that's a minor nit of course. I agree on the ata prefixing, the ide-* has always annoyed me as well. And you can rename it to tcq.c if you want, I have no oppinion on that. -- Jens Axboe