[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <yq1il51flnj.fsf@ca-mkp.ca.oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2023 23:34:37 -0500
From: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
Cc: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>, axboe@...nel.dk,
kbusch@...nel.org, hch@....de, sagi@...mberg.me,
jejb@...ux.ibm.com, martin.petersen@...cle.com, djwong@...nel.org,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org, dchinner@...hat.com,
jack@...e.cz, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
tytso@....edu, jbongio@...gle.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
jaswin@...ux.ibm.com, bvanassche@....org,
Himanshu Madhani <himanshu.madhani@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/16] block: Add atomic write operations to
request_queue limits
Hi Ming!
>> + lim->atomic_write_unit_min_sectors = 0;
>> + lim->atomic_write_unit_max_sectors = 0;
>> + lim->atomic_write_max_sectors = 0;
>> + lim->atomic_write_boundary_sectors = 0;
>
> Can we move the four into single structure and setup them in single
> API? Then cross-validation can be done in this API.
Why would we put them in a separate struct? We don't do that for any of
the other queue_limits.
--
Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering
Powered by blists - more mailing lists