linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] UBI: Block: Add blk-mq support

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: <545C96A1.40304@nod.at>
Date:	Fri, 07 Nov 2014 10:53:37 +0100
From:	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To:	dedekind1@...il.com
CC:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, axboe@...com,
	ezequiel.garcia@...e-electrons.com, dwmw2@...radead.org,
	computersforpeace@...il.com, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] UBI: Block: Add blk-mq support

Am 07.11.2014 um 10:46 schrieb Artem Bityutskiy:
> On Mon, 2014-11-03 at 09:23 +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> Am 03.11.2014 um 09:18 schrieb Christoph Hellwig:
>>> On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 02:00:55PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>>>> +#define UBIBLOCK_SG_COUNT 64
>>>
>>>
>>> Can you document why you choose this number? The default nr_request
>>> for the old code would be 128.
>>
>> Is 64 a problem? Beside of the fact that I forgot to set blk_queue_max_segments().
>> I used this number because 128 seemed a bit high and my goal was to
>> keep the memory footprint small.
>> This is also why I've set tag_set.queue_depth to 64.
> 
> The request was to document, so lets' document the choice.

Of course I'll document it. But so far I had no time to do a
v2 of this patch.

Thanks,
//richard
--
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/