public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lou Langholtz <ldl@aros.net>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.5.70 add_disk(disk) re-registering disk->queue->elevator.kobj (bug?!)
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2003 18:29:19 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3EDD3D5F.3010509@aros.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030603120717.66012855.akpm@digeo.com>

Andrew Morton wrote:

>Lou Langholtz <ldl@aros.net> wrote:
>  
>
>>Or perhaps the block 
>>handling logic was changed such that disks don't share the same 
>>request_queue anymore. If so, then a few drivers (like nbd) need to be 
>>updated to use a seperate request_queue per disk.
>>    
>>
>
>The ramdisk driver was recently changed to do exactly this.  From what
>you say it appears that nbd needs the same treatment.
>  
>
I noticed that too but thought surely that couldn't be why the rd driver 
was changes. Cause... then it would seem via 'grep blk_init_queue 
drivers/block/*.c' that most of the block drivers need to be changed. 
And having a request_queue structure for every disk that's often (in 
these drivers) every minor device, seems like a lot of unneeded memory 
usage too. I'm afraid to ask this, but are you sure that each disk 
really is supposed to have its own request queue now? That seems less 
sensible than inverting the kobject parenting logic so that the 
request_queue.elevator kobject is the parent of the disk kobject. After 
all, makes more sense for multiple gen_disk objects to belong to the 
same elevator than for multiple elevators to belong to the same gen_disk 
no???

Anyways.... thanks for setting me straight ;-)

Lou


  reply	other threads:[~2003-06-04  0:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-06-03 18:33 2.5.70 add_disk(disk) re-registering disk->queue->elevator.kobj (bug?!) Lou Langholtz
2003-06-03 19:07 ` Andrew Morton
2003-06-04  0:29   ` Lou Langholtz [this message]
2003-06-04  0:56     ` viro
2003-06-04 16:08       ` Patrick Mochel
2003-06-04  1:00     ` Andrew Morton
2003-06-04  1:06       ` viro
2003-06-04 16:07         ` Lou Langholtz

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=3EDD3D5F.3010509@aros.net \
    --to=ldl@aros.net \
    --cc=akpm@digeo.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