On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Mike Snitzer wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Aug 30 2010 at 11:45am -0400, > Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Here's a version w/ BUG_ON() added. Once the queue hang issue is > > tracked down, I'll refresh the whole series and repost. > > When you next send out the refreshed series, could you cc dm-devel any > patches that touch DM directly or block patches that are required to > support DM? > > It'd be great to cc Mikulas Patocka on those patches too (I cc'd him). > Mikulas will be reviewing these DM patches now that we have something > that works with your larger FLUSH+FUA patchset. > > Thanks, > Mike My recommended approach to this (on non-request-based dm) is to simply let the current barrier infrastructure be as it is --- you don't need to change it now, you can simply map FUA write to barrier write and FLUSH to zero-data barrier --- and it won't cause any data corruption. It will just force unneeded I/O queue draining. Once FLUSH+FUA interface is finalized and committed upstream, we can remove that I/O queue draining from dm to improve performance. Mikulas -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
