From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262841AbUCRSLR (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Mar 2004 13:11:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262839AbUCRSLR (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Mar 2004 13:11:17 -0500 Received: from smtp02.uc3m.es ([163.117.136.122]:31190 "EHLO smtp02.uc3m.es") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262838AbUCRSLE (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Mar 2004 13:11:04 -0500 From: "Peter T. Breuer" Message-Id: <200403181811.i2IIB1f18197@oboe.it.uc3m.es> Subject: Re: floppy driver 2.6.3 question In-Reply-To: <20040318161647.GT22234@suse.de> from Jens Axboe at "Mar 18, 2004 05:16:48 pm" To: Jens Axboe Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 19:11:01 +0100 (MET) Cc: linux kernel X-Anonymously-To: Reply-To: ptb@it.uc3m.es X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL66 (25)] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org "Also sprach Jens Axboe:" > > I mean that I thought that if ->flags & REQ_SPECIAL were set, then > > we were obliged to flush the driver request queue before treating > > this request, and I also thought that the driver was liable to receive > > such things from somewhere else. > > I dunno where you get those crazy ideas, REQ_SPECIAL has absolutely > nothing to do with that. Sorry about that. Perhaps I saw it in 2.5. > You may use REQ_SPECIAL bit as you see fit, and ->special as well. You > don't have to use them together, must do though. However, as I said > earlier, if you push these requests on to someone else request queue, > you must not fiddle with REQ_SPECIAL and/or ->special. In that case you > cannot touch/use more than what the block layer already does. Well hooray. All seems to be working fine now that I shifted the burden to ->special and stopped playing with ->flags (touch wood). Even revalidation is working AOK as far as I can tell. I'll reenable that read of the first block a-la-floppy to see if it causes some extra magic. Many thanks! > > Are you going to say, set REQ_SPECIAL on everything and add all the > > real request info and a bit more to ->special? I suspect you are! > > That's where to put it, indeed. But if you pass it on... Peter