[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1381349594.19256.486.camel@haakon3.risingtidesystems.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 13:13:14 -0700
From: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>
To: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
target-devel <target-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: scsi-mq updated to latest linux-block/new-queue
On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 21:46 +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 12:12:51PM -0700, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > Just a heads up that the scsi-mq alpha branch has been updated to Jen's
> > latest linux-block/new-queue containing hch's recent blk-mq
> > improvements, along with Alexander's patch for the is_flush_fua +
> > queue_depth=1 bug.
>
>
> Oh, I have not expected it could be picked up. In fact I agree it needs
> to be updated with what you spotted:
>
> "Also, these extra increments should probably happen only when the passed
> queue_depth == 1 && reserved_tags == 0."
Yes, of course. Fixing that up now in blk_mq_init_queue().
>
> What is the criteria for patches to include in your tree? I would suggest
> to consider this one https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/9/90 if it fits.
>
Since it's libata related, I'd like Tejun (CC'ed) to be comfortable with
the approach first..
As I'm still using IDE for my rootfs with scsi-mq, I'd be fine with
applying it for AHCI testing purposes if there are no objections.
Care to send out an updated version..?
--nab
--
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