linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/10] block: remove per-queue plugging

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4DA3EF3B.9080804@fusionio.com>
Date:	Tue, 12 Apr 2011 08:20:43 +0200
From:	Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com>
To:	"hch@...radead.org" <hch@...radead.org>
CC:	NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"dm-devel@...hat.com" <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
	"linux-raid@...r.kernel.org" <linux-raid@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] block: remove per-queue plugging

On 2011-04-12 00:58, hch@...radead.org wrote:
> Looking at the patch
> (http://git.kernel.dk/?p=linux-2.6-block.git;a=commitdiff;h=761e433f3de6fb8e369af9e5c08beb86286d023f)
> 
> I'm not sure it's an optimal design.  The flush callback really
> is a per-queue thing.  Why isn't it a function pointer in the request
> queue when doing the blk_run_queue call once we're done with a given
> queue before moving on to the next one?

I was thinking about this yesterday as well, the design didn't quite
feel just right. Additionally the user now must track this state too,
and whether he's plugged on that task or not.

I'll rewrite this.

-- 
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/