Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755670AbcJMUN6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Oct 2016 16:13:58 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f43.google.com ([209.85.218.43]:33208 "EHLO mail-oi0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752376AbcJMUNu (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Oct 2016 16:13:50 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1476388433-2539-2-git-send-email-adam.manzanares@hgst.com> References: <1476388433-2539-1-git-send-email-adam.manzanares@hgst.com> <1476388433-2539-2-git-send-email-adam.manzanares@hgst.com> From: Dan Williams Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 13:06:16 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] block: Add iocontext priority to request To: Adam Manzanares Cc: Jens Axboe , Tejun Heo , Hannes Reinecke , "Martin K. Petersen" , mchristi@redhat.com, Toshi Kani , Ming Lei , sathya.prakash@broadcom.com, chaitra.basappa@broadcom.com, suganath-prabu.subramani@broadcom.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, "IDE/ATA development list" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , MPT-FusionLinux.pdl@broadcom.com, linux-scsi , Adam Manzananares Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1557 Lines: 37 On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Adam Manzanares wrote: > Patch adds an association between iocontext ioprio and the ioprio of a > request. This value is set in blk_rq_set_prio which takes the request and > the ioc as arguments. If the ioc is valid in blk_rq_set_prio then the > iopriority of the request is set as the iopriority of the ioc. In > init_request_from_bio a check is made to see if the ioprio of the bio is > valid and if so then the request prio comes from the bio. > > Signed-off-by: Adam Manzananares > --- > block/blk-core.c | 4 +++- > include/linux/blkdev.h | 14 ++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c > index 14d7c07..361b1b9 100644 > --- a/block/blk-core.c > +++ b/block/blk-core.c > @@ -1153,6 +1153,7 @@ static struct request *__get_request(struct request_list *rl, int op, > > blk_rq_init(q, rq); > blk_rq_set_rl(rq, rl); > + blk_rq_set_prio(rq, ioc); > req_set_op_attrs(rq, op, op_flags | REQ_ALLOCED); > > /* init elvpriv */ > @@ -1656,7 +1657,8 @@ void init_request_from_bio(struct request *req, struct bio *bio) > > req->errors = 0; > req->__sector = bio->bi_iter.bi_sector; > - req->ioprio = bio_prio(bio); > + if (ioprio_valid(bio_prio(bio))) > + req->ioprio = bio_prio(bio); Should we use ioprio_best() here? If req->ioprio and bio_prio() disagree one side has explicitly asked for a higher priority.