[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <93b0f8fc-e6d4-48a6-8790-a9e7cf649b63@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 19:33:38 +0000
From: Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@...dia.com>
To: John Meneghini <jmeneghi@...hat.com>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@...dia.com>, "emilne@...hat.com"
<emilne@...hat.com>
CC: "linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
"hch@....de" <hch@....de>, "sagi@...mberg.me" <sagi@...mberg.me>,
"kbusch@...nel.org" <kbusch@...nel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "jrani@...estorage.com"
<jrani@...estorage.com>, "randyj@...estorage.com" <randyj@...estorage.com>,
"hare@...nel.org" <hare@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] nvme: multipath: Implemented new iopolicy
"queue-depth"
On 5/23/24 7:42 AM, John Meneghini wrote:
>
> On 5/23/24 02:28, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>> As presented at LSF by Daniel; ALUA support (and, with that,
>> multipath support) is one of the topics to be implemented for blktests.
>> And without that we can't have a meaningful QD test.
>
> So as a part of this patch you want a blktest that verifies
> queue-depth multipathing?
>
> Or are your just tying acceptance of this patch to a blktest that
> tests multipath testing over all?
>
as I mentioned this earlier having a blktest is not a blocker for
acceptance of this patch at all
once this patch is merged it'd be nice to have it, but you have to wait
for Daniel's ALUA support
as mentioned by Hannes in previous email ...
> Seems to me you have a patch designed to do that...
>
> https://github.com/osandov/blktests/pull/114
>
> /John
-ck
Powered by blists - more mailing lists