From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@trippelsdorf.de>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: eliminate ELEVATOR_INSERT_REQUEUE
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 13:56:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D91C8E7.5070205@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110328221547.GA1118@redhat.com>
On 2011-03-29 00:15, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 28 2011 at 4:23am -0400,
> Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:21:56AM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
>>> Should blk_kick_flush() process the flush request without calling
>>> elv_insert() -- like is done with open coded list_add() in
>>> blk_insert_flush()?
>>>
>>> Or should blk_insert_flush() use elv_insert() with
>>> ELEVATOR_INSERT_REQUEUE too?
>>
>> Hmmm... I would prefer the latter. Given that INSERT_REQUEUE and
>> FRONT are no longer different, it would probably be better to use
>> FRONT tho. The only reason REQUEUE is used there is to avoid kicking
>> the queue from elv_insert(), which is gone now.
>
> OK, I came up with the following patch.
>
> Jens, this is just a natural cleanup given the code that resulted from
> the flush-merge and onstack plugging changes coming together.
That looks nice and clean. What kind of testing has been done?
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-29 11:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-25 15:15 [OOPS] elevator private data for REQ_FLUSH Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-03-25 15:22 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-03-25 15:40 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-03-25 15:50 ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-25 18:54 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-03-25 19:50 ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-26 4:21 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-03-28 8:23 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-28 22:15 ` [PATCH] block: eliminate ELEVATOR_INSERT_REQUEUE (was: Re: elevator private data for REQ_FLUSH) Mike Snitzer
2011-03-29 11:56 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2011-03-29 14:18 ` block: eliminate ELEVATOR_INSERT_REQUEUE Mike Snitzer
2011-03-29 18:25 ` [PATCH] " Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-30 7:42 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30 7:53 ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-29 14:13 ` [PATCH] block: eliminate ELEVATOR_INSERT_REQUEUE (was: Re: elevator private data for REQ_FLUSH) Jeff Moyer
2011-03-29 17:54 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-30 7:41 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30 7:57 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30 7:59 ` [PATCH] block: eliminate ELEVATOR_INSERT_REQUEUE Jens Axboe
2011-03-30 8:02 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30 10:16 ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-30 11:20 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30 11:23 ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-30 11:21 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-03-30 11:22 ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-30 11:49 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-03-30 13:46 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-30 13:49 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30 14:01 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-03-30 14:27 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30 15:22 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-30 15:30 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30 17:13 ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-30 17:32 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30 17:56 ` Jeff Moyer
2011-03-30 18:12 ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-25 15:57 ` [OOPS] elevator private data for REQ_FLUSH Jens Axboe
2011-03-25 16:03 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
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=4D91C8E7.5070205@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=markus@trippelsdorf.de \
--cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
--cc=snitzer@redhat.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
/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