[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a3fc1d06-7624-3283-ea6e-40a7a0b0fb39@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2022 05:10:31 +0000
From: Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@...dia.com>
To: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@...dia.com>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"johannes.thumshirn@....com" <johannes.thumshirn@....com>,
"bvanassche@....org" <bvanassche@....org>,
"ming.lei@...hat.com" <ming.lei@...hat.com>,
"shinichiro.kawasaki@....com" <shinichiro.kawasaki@....com>,
"vincent.fu@...sung.com" <vincent.fu@...sung.com>,
"yukuai3@...wei.com" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] null_blk: allow write zeores on membacked
On 10/4/22 21:57, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 10/5/22 12:16, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
>> Add a helper functions to enable the REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES operations
>> when null_blk is configured with the membacked mode.
>>
>> Since write-zeroes is a non-trivial I/O operation we need this to
>> add a blktest so we can test the non-trivial I/O path from the
>> application to the block layer.
>
> Why a separate patch for this ? Introducing the module argument and
> configfs equivalent separately in 2 different patches is strange and does
> not facilitate review.
>
> This patch should be merged with patch 1.
>
Sounds good will merge it.
-ck
Powered by blists - more mailing lists