Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751996Ab1BDPFL (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Feb 2011 10:05:11 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:54086 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751098Ab1BDPFJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Feb 2011 10:05:09 -0500 Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 10:04:57 -0500 From: Vivek Goyal To: Tejun Heo Cc: Jens Axboe , 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" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] block: skip elevator data initialization for flush requests Message-ID: <20110204150456.GD32190@redhat.com> References: <20110201185225.GT14211@htj.dyndns.org> <1296600373-6906-1-git-send-email-snitzer@redhat.com> <20110202225549.GA28109@redhat.com> <4D4AAC9A.4050407@fusionio.com> <20110203133820.GF2570@htj.dyndns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110203133820.GF2570@htj.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1247 Lines: 30 On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 02:38:20PM +0100, Tejun Heo wrote: > 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? Though you did not like the V1 of patch, personally I also liked just parsing FLUSH or FUA flag in get_request(). Or how about intoducing a helper function blk_rq_should_init_elevator() or something like that and this function will parse FLUSH, FUA flags. Thanks Vivek -- 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/