[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100511131856.GB25211@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 09:18:56 -0400
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Cc: dm-devel@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@...jp.nec.com>,
"Jun'ichi Nomura" <j-nomura@...jp.nec.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] block: allow initialization of previously
allocated request_queue
On Tue, May 11 2010 at 2:55am -0400,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 10 2010, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > blk_init_queue() allocates the request_queue structure and then
> > initializes it as needed (request_fn, elevator, etc).
> >
> > Split initialization out to blk_init_allocated_queue_node.
> > Introduce blk_init_allocated_queue wrapper function to model existing
> > blk_init_queue and blk_init_queue_node interfaces.
> >
> > Export elv_register_queue to allow a newly added elevator to be
> > registered with sysfs. Export elv_unregister_queue for symmetry.
> >
> > These changes allow DM to initialize a device's request_queue with more
> > precision. In particular, DM no longer unconditionally initializes a
> > full request_queue (elevator et al). It only does so for a
> > request-based DM device.
>
> Looks good, I'll apply this. I don't think the exports need to be _GPL
> in this case, generally I've only done that with the exports for hooking
> in a new IO scheduler.
OK, thanks for picking this up. Do you want me to send v2 that drops
the _GPL or will you make those changes?
Mike
--
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