[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E417C87.5040105@fusionio.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2011 20:29:27 +0200
From: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com>
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
CC: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [block] allow blk_flush_policy to return REQ_FSEQ_DATA independent
of *FLUSH
On 2011-08-09 17:24, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> blk_insert_flush has the following check:
>
> /*
> * If there's data but flush is not necessary, the request can be
> * processed directly without going through flush machinery. Queue
> * for normal execution.
> */
> if ((policy & REQ_FSEQ_DATA) &&
> !(policy & (REQ_FSEQ_PREFLUSH | REQ_FSEQ_POSTFLUSH))) {
> list_add_tail(&rq->queuelist, &q->queue_head);
> return;
> }
>
> However, blk_flush_policy will not return with policy set to only
> REQ_FSEQ_DATA:
>
> static unsigned int blk_flush_policy(unsigned int fflags, struct request *rq)
> {
> unsigned int policy = 0;
>
> if (fflags & REQ_FLUSH) {
> if (rq->cmd_flags & REQ_FLUSH)
> policy |= REQ_FSEQ_PREFLUSH;
> if (blk_rq_sectors(rq))
> policy |= REQ_FSEQ_DATA;
> if (!(fflags & REQ_FUA) && (rq->cmd_flags & REQ_FUA))
> policy |= REQ_FSEQ_POSTFLUSH;
> }
> return policy;
> }
>
> Notice that REQ_FSEQ_DATA is only set if REQ_FLUSH is set. Fix this
> mismatch by moving the setting of REQ_FSEQ_DATA outside of the REQ_FLUSH
> check.
Thanks Jeff, applied.
--
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