[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200712062313.43383.phillips@phunq.net>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 23:13:42 -0800
From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@...nq.net>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: davidsen@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
peterz@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] A clean approach to writeout throttling
On Thursday 06 December 2007 16:29, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 16:04:41 -0800
>
> Daniel Phillips <phillips@...nq.net> wrote:
> > The runner up key idea is that we will gain a notion of "block
> > device stack" (or block stack for short, so that we may implement
> > block stackers) which for the time being will simply be Device
> > Mapper's notion of device stack, however many warts that may have.
> > It's there now and we use it for ddsnap.
>
> Perhaps all we need to track is the outermost point?
>
> submit_bio(...)
> {
> bool remove_the_rq = false;
>
> ...
> if (current->the_rq == NULL) {
> current->the_rq = rq;
> remove_the_rq = true;
> }
> ...
> if (remove_the_rq)
> current->the_rq = NULL;
> }
>
> ?
The parent patch already has that crucial property in a simple say, see
if (q && q->metric && !bio->bi_queue) {
bio->bi_queue = q;
Regards,
Daniel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists