From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752131AbXLRHtN (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Dec 2007 02:49:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750912AbXLRHtD (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Dec 2007 02:49:03 -0500 Received: from brick.kernel.dk ([87.55.233.238]:9552 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750788AbXLRHtB (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Dec 2007 02:49:01 -0500 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 08:44:40 +0100 From: Jens Axboe To: Nick Piggin Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [rfc][patch 1/3] block: non-atomic queue_flags prep Message-ID: <20071218074439.GB31964@kernel.dk> References: <20071215054315.GA30335@wotan.suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071215054315.GA30335@wotan.suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Dec 15 2007, Nick Piggin wrote: > Hi, > > This is just an idea I had, which might make request processing a little > bit cheaper depending on queue behaviour. For example if it is getting plugged > unplugged frequently (as I think is the case for some database workloads), > then we might save one or two atomic operations per request. > > Anyway, I'm not completely sure if I have ensured all queue_flags users are > safe (I think md may need a bit of help). But overall it seems quite doable. Looks ok to me, I'll throw it into the testing mix. Thanks Nick! -- Jens Axboe