mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Cc: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@trippelsdorf.de>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: eliminate ELEVATOR_INSERT_REQUEUE (was: Re: elevator private data for REQ_FLUSH)
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:57:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110330075752.GC17523@htj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110330074123.GA17523@htj.dyndns.org>

On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 09:41:23AM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
> IIRC, at least in the requeue path, some drivers depend on front
> queueing for forward progress guarantee.  Forward progress for
> prepping is guaranteed by mempool (or something like that) and when
> the request is retried, it should stay at the front of the queue;
> otherwise, prepping can stall with prepped requests stuck behind
> unprepped ones.

After writing the above, I think the current flush implementation
actually is violating the above.  I think the problem is over-use of
front insertion.  Flush can just append to the dispatch queue.  Front
insertion should only be used by requeueing, really.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2011-03-30  7:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-03-25 15:15 [OOPS] elevator private data for REQ_FLUSH Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-03-25 15:22 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-03-25 15:40   ` Mike Snitzer
2011-03-25 15:50     ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-25 18:54       ` Mike Snitzer
2011-03-25 19:50         ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-26  4:21           ` Mike Snitzer
2011-03-28  8:23             ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-28 22:15               ` [PATCH] block: eliminate ELEVATOR_INSERT_REQUEUE (was: Re: elevator private data for REQ_FLUSH) Mike Snitzer
2011-03-29 11:56                 ` [PATCH] block: eliminate ELEVATOR_INSERT_REQUEUE Jens Axboe
2011-03-29 14:18                   ` Mike Snitzer
2011-03-29 18:25                   ` [PATCH] " Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-30  7:42                     ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30  7:53                     ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-29 14:13                 ` [PATCH] block: eliminate ELEVATOR_INSERT_REQUEUE (was: Re: elevator private data for REQ_FLUSH) Jeff Moyer
2011-03-29 17:54                   ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-30  7:41                     ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30  7:57                       ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2011-03-30  7:59                         ` [PATCH] block: eliminate ELEVATOR_INSERT_REQUEUE Jens Axboe
2011-03-30  8:02                           ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30 10:16                             ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-30 11:20                               ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30 11:23                                 ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-30 11:21                               ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-03-30 11:22                                 ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-30 11:49                                   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-03-30 13:46                             ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-30 13:49                               ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30 14:01                             ` Mike Snitzer
2011-03-30 14:27                               ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30 15:22                                 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-30 15:30                                   ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30 17:13                                     ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-30 17:32                                       ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-30 17:56                                       ` Jeff Moyer
2011-03-30 18:12                                         ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-25 15:57   ` [OOPS] elevator private data for REQ_FLUSH Jens Axboe
2011-03-25 16:03     ` Markus Trippelsdorf

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20110330075752.GC17523@htj.dyndns.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
    --cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=markus@trippelsdorf.de \
    --cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
    --cc=snitzer@redhat.com \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome