Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932146Ab1BCNi2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Feb 2011 08:38:28 -0500 Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com ([209.85.161.46]:57696 "EHLO mail-fx0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756363Ab1BCNi0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Feb 2011 08:38:26 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=LnB1rbM3LBCdHFWuWSqwVtBPU4aSDSSjW20qWajFTjrjgaqbiEXGwtOnwqDP36rJkk r//RC4GCcXyZZUXbbiqF2RUWlsoygkwHhy/HCrIWh8TxSiRWafXzc73A8A+7aKQpu8KW wVxXEAEPEan+7zDS7IlTLyLWXLimhIjxTFWh8= Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 14:38:20 +0100 From: Tejun Heo To: Jens Axboe Cc: Mike Snitzer , "tytso@mit.edu" , "djwong@us.ibm.com" , "shli@kernel.org" , "neilb@suse.de" , "adilger.kernel@dilger.ca" , "jack@suse.cz" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "kmannth@us.ibm.com" , "cmm@us.ibm.com" , "linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" , "rwheeler@redhat.com" , "hch@lst.de" , "josef@redhat.com" , "jmoyer@redhat.com" , "vgoyal@redhat.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] block: skip elevator data initialization for flush requests Message-ID: <20110203133820.GF2570@htj.dyndns.org> References: <20110201185225.GT14211@htj.dyndns.org> <1296600373-6906-1-git-send-email-snitzer@redhat.com> <20110202225549.GA28109@redhat.com> <4D4AAC9A.4050407@fusionio.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4D4AAC9A.4050407@fusionio.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 905 Lines: 25 Hey, Jens. On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 02:24:42PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 2011-02-02 23:55, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > REQ_SORTED is not set for flush requests because they are never put on > > the IO scheduler. > > That looks very wrong. REQ_SORTED gets set _when_ the request is sorted > into the IO scheduler. This is gross misuse, a bad hack. The rationale behind suggesting was that it indicates to the allocator that the request may be sorted as how the request will be used is communicated using @rw_flags to the allocator. The patch is buggy that the flag actually ends up on the request. Any better idea how to communicate it? Thanks. -- tejun -- 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/