[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3d0b38bb-537d-94ff-574f-587bad949fdd@kernel.dk>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:30:07 -0600
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
Linux-Kernal <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] introduce the BFQ-v0 I/O scheduler as an extra
scheduler
On 10/28/2016 03:32 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> The patch to enable MQ looks like this:
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/linusw/linux-stericsson.git/commit/?h=mmc-mq&id=8f79b527e2e854071d8da019451da68d4753f71d
BTW, another viable "hack" for the depth issue would be to expose more
than one hardware queue. It's meant to map to a distinct submission
region in the hardware, but there's nothing stopping the driver from
using it differently. Might not be cleaner than just increasing the
queue depth on a single queue, though.
That still won't solve the issue of lying about it and causing IO
scheduler confusion, of course.
Also, 4.8 and newer have support for BLK_MQ_F_BLOCKING, if you need to
block in ->queue_rq(). That could eliminate the need to offload to a
kthread manually.
--
Jens Axboe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists