Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Sender: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 15 Dec 2022 06:46:54 -1000
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To:     hanjinke <hanjinke.666@bytedance.com>
Cc:     josef@toxicpanda.com, axboe@kernel.dk, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [RFC PATCH] blk-throtl: Introduce sync queue for
 write ios
Message-ID: <Y5tPftzjXN6RcswM@slm.duckdns.org>
References: <20221206163826.10700-1-hanjinke.666@bytedance.com>
 <Y5et48VryiKgL/eD@slm.duckdns.org>
 <1e53592f-b1f1-df85-3edb-eba4c5a5f989@bytedance.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1e53592f-b1f1-df85-3edb-eba4c5a5f989@bytedance.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 12:02:53PM +0800, hanjinke wrote:
> Should we keep the main category of io based READ and WRITE, and within READ
> / WRITE the subcategory were SYNC and ASYNC ? This may give less intrusion
> into existing frameworks.

Ah, you haven't posted yet. So, yeah, let's do this. The code was a bit odd
looking after adding the sync queue on the side. For reads, we can just
consider everything synchrnous (or maybe treat SYNC the same way, I don't
know whether reads actually use SYNC flags tho).

Thanks.

-- 
tejun