From: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
To: Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch@dell.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: rq_flag_bits and bio bi_rw flags
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 08:30:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060818063012.GB798@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060817222752.GA19442@lists.us.dell.com>
On Thu, Aug 17 2006, Matt Domsch wrote:
> Jens, I'm hoping you can clear something up for me.
>
> ll_rw_blk.c:
> void blk_rq_bio_prep(request_queue_t *q, struct request *rq, struct
> bio *bio)
> {
> /* first three bits are identical in rq->flags and bio->bi_rw
> */
> rq->flags |= (bio->bi_rw & 7);
>
> That was recently changed to be the first 2 bits not 3. But it made
> me look.
>
> /*
> * bio bi_rw flags
> *
> * bit 0 -- read (not set) or write (set)
> * bit 1 -- rw-ahead when set
> * bit 2 -- barrier
> * bit 3 -- fail fast, don't want low level driver retries
> * bit 4 -- synchronous I/O hint: the block layer will unplug immediately
> */
> #define BIO_RW 0
> #define BIO_RW_AHEAD 1
> #define BIO_RW_BARRIER 2
> #define BIO_RW_FAILFAST 3
> #define BIO_RW_SYNC 4
>
>
> /*
> * first three bits match BIO_RW* bits, important
> */
> enum rq_flag_bits {
> __REQ_RW, /* not set, read. set, write */
> __REQ_FAILFAST, /* no low level driver retries */
> __REQ_SORTED, /* elevator knows about this request
> */
>
>
> The first bit matches. The second doesn't (BIO_RW_AHEAD vs
> __REQ_FAILFAST). And obviously you just fixed the third bit.
>
> Should BIO_RW_FAILFAST == __REQ_FAILFAST instead?
It does match, a rw-ahead request implies fail fast since we don't want
to be retrying read-head type IO. Could do with a better comment though,
but it's fully on purpose.
--
Jens Axboe
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-08-18 6:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-08-17 22:27 rq_flag_bits and bio bi_rw flags Matt Domsch
2006-08-18 6:30 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
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=20060818063012.GB798@suse.de \
--to=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=Matt_Domsch@dell.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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