linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] blk-mq: allow direct dispatch to a driver specific workqueue

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: <20141103101039.GA10128@lst.de>
Date:	Mon, 3 Nov 2014 11:10:39 +0100
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:	Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>,
	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
	ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] blk-mq: allow direct dispatch to a driver specific
	workqueue

On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 04:40:47PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> The above two aren't enough because the big problem is that
> drivers need a per-request work structure instead of 'hctx->run_work',
> otherwise there are at most NR_CPUS concurrent submissions.
> 
> So the per-request work structure should be exposed to blk-mq
> too for the kind of usage, such as .blk_mq_req_work(req) callback
> in case of BLK_MQ_F_WORKQUEUE.

Hmm.  Maybe a better option is to just add a flag to never defer
->queue_rq to a workqueue and let drivers handle the it?
--
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/