[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdZugGOPkYaKnQjY-SJ5-+OCiv_mmWvd3=eM=_ACd+UQQA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 19:18:30 +0700
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Fabio Checconi <fchecconi@...il.com>,
Arianna Avanzini <avanzini.arianna@...il.com>,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 09/22] block, cfq: replace CFQ with the BFQ-v0 I/O scheduler
On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
> Btw, can someone explain why you guys waste so much time hacking and
> arguing about a legacy codebase (old request code and I/O schedulers)
> that everyone would really like to see disappear. Why don't you
> spend your time on blk-mq where you have an entirely clean slate
> for scheduling?
Depends on what time horizon and target I'd say. Paolo was in contact with
the MMC/SD subsystem maintainer Ulf Hansson. (e)MMC/SD are both
synchronous command-response-based protocols, and as of today
single-channel. So everone's smartphone and tablet etc are today
single-channel. I don't know if there is even a protocol change coming
to augment this, the only duct-tapeish solution I've heard about is
command queueing which is basically a kind of pipelining of requests.
So: large userbase in all things handheld.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists