Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763231AbYBSJn4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Feb 2008 04:43:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752471AbYBSJnr (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Feb 2008 04:43:47 -0500 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:44471 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759204AbYBSJnq (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Feb 2008 04:43:46 -0500 Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 10:43:48 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: David Chinner , Michael Tokarev , Ric Wheeler , device-mapper development , Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [dm-devel] Re: [PATCH] Implement barrier support for single device DM devices Message-ID: <20080219094348.GE6485@one.firstfloor.org> References: <20080215120821.GA8267@basil.nowhere.org> <20080215122002.GM29914@agk.fab.redhat.com> <47B58EAA.8040405@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <20080215142010.GA29552@one.firstfloor.org> <20080215141229.GB1788@agk.fab.redhat.com> <47B97E87.6040209@emc.com> <47B9870B.8060005@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <20080218221644.GN155407@sgi.com> <20080219025643.GD4066@agk.fab.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080219025643.GD4066@agk.fab.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1023 Lines: 21 > My complaint about having to support them within dm when more than one > device is involved is because any efficiencies disappear: you can't send > further I/O to any one device until all the other devices have completed > their barrier (or else later I/O to that device could overtake the > barrier on another device). And then I argue that it would be better I was wondering: would it help DM to have the concept of a "barrier window" As in "this barrier is only affective for this group of requests" With such a concept DM would need to stall only inside the groups and possible even issue such barrier groups in parallel, couldn't it? I'm sure you guys all have thought far more about barriers than I ever did; if that idea came up before why was it dismissed? -Andi -- 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/