[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090629101841.GF23611@kernel.dk>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:18:41 +0200
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>
Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
device-mapper development <dm-devel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] REQUEST for new 'topology' metrics to be moved out
of the 'queue' sysfs directory.
On Sat, Jun 27 2009, Neil Brown wrote:
> > There's no such thing as first or second class block devices. The fact
> > that drivers using ->make_request_fn directly do not utilize the full
> > scope of the queue isn't a very interesting fact, imho.
>
> Your phrase "drivers using ->make_request_fn directly" seems to
> suggest you are looking at things very differently to me.
>
> From my perspective, all drivers use ->make_request_fn equally.
> Some set it to "__make_request", some to "md_make_request", others to
> "dm_request" or "loop_make_request" etc.
Neil, will you please stop these silly games. Stop trying to invent
differences based on interpretations of what you read into my replies.
> Each of these different drivers need some private storage.
> __make_request uses struct request_queue
> md_make_request uses struct mddev_s
> dm_request uses struct mapped_device
> loop_make_request uses struct loop_device
> etc
>
> These structures are all attached to gendisk one way or another.
>
> Of these examples, the first three have an extra level. They are
> intermediaries or "midlayers" for multiple drivers and perform some
> processing before passing the request down.
> __make_request provides this for ide and scsi (etc) via ->request_fn and
> ->queuedata in struct request_queue (and other fields).
> md_make_request provides this for raid1 and raid5 (etc) via
> ->pers->make_request and ->private is struct mddev_s (and other
> fields).
> dm_request provides this for crypt and multipath (etc) via
> ->map->targets[]->type->map and ->map->targets[]->private (and
> other fields).
Nothing - I repeat nothing - stops md/dm from removing that layer. It's
a layer they imposed themselves based on the design they chose to
implement internally. It has NOTHING to do with how the block layer is
designed. If md raid1 assigned raid1_dev (or whatever raid1 uses a its
device identifier structure) to ->queuedata, and had an mddev_s in its
raid1 structure, that would be a perfectly viable design as well.
Loop does that. md/dm have their own internal layering, if anything is a
"midlayer" (to keep to the apparent theme of design patterns), it's the
code md and dm bits.
> Looked at from this perspective, the fact that some drivers 'do not
> utilise the full scope of the queue' certainly isn't the interesting
> point. The interesting point is that they have to use parts of the
> queue at all.
>
> And from this perspective, __make_request is a class above everything
> else. __make_request gets a dedicate field in gendisk (->queue) and
> every driver has to provide a queue. Other (lower class) drivers get
> to share gendisk->private_date and/or gendisk->queue->queuedata.
That's just utter nonsense.
--
Jens Axboe
--
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