linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] blk-mq: immediately dispatch big size request

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: <32bef0f6-c194-e31e-3a85-5aa21a6e81a4@fb.com>
Date:   Thu, 3 Nov 2016 22:00:58 -0600
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>
To:     Shaohua Li <shli@...com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
CC:     <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <Kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] blk-mq: immediately dispatch big size request

On 11/03/2016 06:13 PM, Shaohua Li wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 05:09:54PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 05:03:54PM -0700, Shaohua Li wrote:
>>> This is corresponding part for blk-mq. Disk with multiple hardware
>>> queues doesn't need this as we only hold 1 request at most.
>>
>> Any reason you only do this for the SQ and not the MQ case?
>
> Right above:
> Disk with multiple hardware queues doesn't need this as we only hold 1
> request at most.

I've applied 1-2 for 4.10, but we probably should look into unifying
those parts of sq and mq in general. For instance, it doesn't seem to
make a lot of sense why we'd depth limit sq and not mq.

-- 
Jens Axboe