[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120806151731.GA23220@lst.de>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 17:17:31 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Asias He <asias@...hat.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 4/4] virtio-blk: Add REQ_FLUSH and REQ_FUA support
to bio path
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 02:43:04PM +0800, Asias He wrote:
>> Even if it has a payload waiting is highly suboptimal and it should
>> use a non-blocking sequencing like it is done in the request layer.
>
> So, for REQ_FLUSH, what we need is that send out the VIRTIO_BLK_T_FLUSH and
> not to wait.
If it's REQ_FLUSH without data a VIRTIO_BLK_T_FLUSH should be sent out only,
if it's a REQ_FLUSH that has data a VIRTIO_BLK_T_FLUSH should be sent out,
but instead of waiting for it to finish the I/O completion handler should
then submit the actual write.
> We still need to wait until the actual write is finished here?
> Like,
>
> REQ_FUA is emulated by:
> 1. Send the actual write
> 2. Wait until the actual write is finished
> 3. Send VIRTIO_BLK_T_FLUSH to device
> 4. Signal the end of the write to upper layer
Remove step 2 and run step 3 from the I/O completion handler.
--
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