Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757196Ab3J1Q3T (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:29:19 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:54165 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757177Ab3J1Q3S (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:29:18 -0400 Message-ID: <526E90D7.1070604@kernel.dk> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 10:29:11 -0600 From: Jens Axboe User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christoph Hellwig CC: Alexander Gordeev , Tejun Heo , Nicholas Bellinger , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: blk-mq flush fix References: <20131026114612.GA8576@infradead.org> <20131026153124.GA22227@infradead.org> <20131027222914.GG22549@kernel.dk> <20131028084821.GA31270@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20131028084821.GA31270@infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1552 Lines: 37 On 10/28/2013 02:48 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 10:29:25PM +0000, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On Sat, Oct 26 2013, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>> I think this variant of the patch from Alexander should fix the issue >>> in a minimally invasive way. Longer term I'd prefer to use q->flush_rq >>> like in the non-mq case by copying over the context and tag information. >> >> This one is pretty simple, we could definitely use it as a band aid. I >> too would greatly prefer using the static ->flush_rq instead. Just have >> it marked to bypass most of the free logic. > > We already bypass the free logical by setting and end_io callback for > a while, similar to what the old code does. Maybe it's not all that > hard to prealloc the request, let me give a sping. Using the static > allocated one will be hard due to the driver-specific extra data, > though. It's not that I think the existing patch is THAT bad, it fits in alright with the reserved tagging and works regardless of whether a driver uses reserved tags or not. And it does have the upside of not requiring special checks or logic for this special non-tagged request that using the preallocated would might need. >> I'll add this one. > > Gimme another day or so to figure this out. OK, holding off. -- Jens Axboe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/