Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753889Ab2FLUNu (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2012 16:13:50 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:41512 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751623Ab2FLUNt (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2012 16:13:49 -0400 From: Jeff Moyer To: merez@codeaurora.org Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, "DOCUMENTATION" , "open list" Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] block: Add test-iosched scheduler References: <1339491984-8462-1-git-send-email-merez@codeaurora.org> <1339491984-8462-2-git-send-email-merez@codeaurora.org> X-PGP-KeyID: 1F78E1B4 X-PGP-CertKey: F6FE 280D 8293 F72C 65FD 5A58 1FF8 A7CA 1F78 E1B4 X-PCLoadLetter: What the f**k does that mean? Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 16:13:46 -0400 In-Reply-To: (merez@codeaurora.org's message of "Tue, 12 Jun 2012 12:58:44 -0700 (PDT)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1451 Lines: 39 merez@codeaurora.org writes: > On Tue, June 12, 2012 7:09 am, Jeff Moyer wrote: >> Maya Erez writes: >> >>> The test scheduler allows testing a block device by dispatching >>> specific requests according to the test case and declare PASS/FAIL >>> according to the requests completion error code >> >> What sort of tests have you written that make use of this >> infrastructure? >> >>> @@ -1072,8 +1072,6 @@ struct request *blk_get_request(struct >>> request_queue *q, int rw, gfp_t gfp_mask) >>> { >>> struct request *rq; >>> >>> - BUG_ON(rw != READ && rw != WRITE); >>> - >> >> Please explain this. > get_request and get_request_wait, called by blk_get_request, expects to > get the REQ_SYNC flag in addition to the read/write flag. Moreover, it > uses the REQ_SYNC flag in its algorithm decision making. > However blk_get_request expects to get a Boolean to indicate only > read/write flag and cannot handle the REQ_SYNC flag. Right, so why is it okay to change this? Right now, blk_get_request is used for block special requests. There is no sense of sync vs. async for such requests (that's an fs request notion). Perhaps you're calling the wrong function? Cheers, Jeff -- 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/