public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dan Aloni <da-x@monatomic.org>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@fenrus.demon.nl>
Cc: Linux Kernel List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Mike Christie <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi_execute_async() should add to the tail of the queue
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 12:34:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4587C04E.10307@monatomic.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1166522613.3365.1198.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>

Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-12-19 at 10:35 +0200, Dan Aloni wrote:
>   
>> Hello,
>>
>> scsi_execute_async() has replaced scsi_do_req() a few versions ago, 
>> but it also incurred a change of behavior. I noticed that over-queuing 
>> a SCSI device using that function causes I/Os to be starved from 
>> low-level queuing for no justified reason.
>>  
>> I think it makes much more sense to perserve the original behaviour 
>> of scsi_do_req() and add the request to the tail of the queue.
>>     
>
> Hi,
>
> some things should really be added to the head of the queue, like
> maintenance requests and error handling requests. Are you sure this is
> the right change? At least I'd expect 2 apis, one for a head and one for
> a "normal" queueing...
>   
Since a user of scsi_execute_async() would most likely want to have
control over this, it would be better to add a parameter and fix the
current users of the function.

However, if we take this route we might have duplicate code
across mid-layer drivers (sg, st, osst), because they may choose to
prioritize I/Os in similar ways.

So instead of adding a parameter, we can make scsi_execute_async()
decide for itself based on the SCSI command, with read/write I/Os
taking the lowest priority.

Suggestions?


  reply	other threads:[~2006-12-19 10:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-12-19  8:35 [PATCH] scsi_execute_async() should add to the tail of the queue Dan Aloni
2006-12-19 10:03 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-12-19 10:34   ` Dan Aloni [this message]
2006-12-20 23:50     ` Jeremy Linton
2006-12-19 11:26   ` Jens Axboe
2006-12-19 18:34     ` Jon Escombe
2006-12-19 18:44       ` Jens Axboe
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-12-19  0:02 Dan Aloni
2006-12-20 20:40 ` Steven Hayter
2006-12-21  7:12   ` Dan Aloni

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=4587C04E.10307@monatomic.org \
    --to=da-x@monatomic.org \
    --cc=arjan@fenrus.demon.nl \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=michaelc@cs.wisc.edu \
    /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