[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f9b014a8098cce8e4bac8d333d7101c0.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 12:58:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: merez@...eaurora.org
To: "Jeff Moyer" <jmoyer@...hat.com>
Cc: "Maya Erez" <merez@...eaurora.org>, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
"DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] block: Add test-iosched scheduler
On Tue, June 12, 2012 7:09 am, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Maya Erez <merez@...eaurora.org> writes:
>
>> The test scheduler allows testing a block device by dispatching
>> specific requests according to the test case and declare PASS/FAIL
>> according to the requests completion error code
>
> What sort of tests have you written that make use of this
> infrastructure?
>
>> @@ -1072,8 +1072,6 @@ struct request *blk_get_request(struct
>> request_queue *q, int rw, gfp_t gfp_mask)
>> {
>> struct request *rq;
>>
>> - BUG_ON(rw != READ && rw != WRITE);
>> -
>
> Please explain this.
get_request and get_request_wait, called by blk_get_request, expects to
get the REQ_SYNC flag in addition to the read/write flag. Moreover, it
uses the REQ_SYNC flag in its algorithm decision making.
However blk_get_request expects to get a Boolean to indicate only
read/write flag and cannot handle the REQ_SYNC flag.
>
> Cheers,
> Jeff
>
--
Sent by consultant of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum
--
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