On 12/10/2015 04:33 PM, Martin K. Petersen wrote: >>>>>> "Mikulas" == Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > Mikulas, > > Mikulas> This patch series adds copy offload (the XCOPY command) to the > Mikulas> block layer, SCSI subsystems and device mapper. > > Now that the VFS stuff appears to stabilize I agree it's a good time to > revisit all this. I just merged the required VPD patches from Hannes so > those will be in 4.5. > > I have a bunch of changes to the SCSI code that I worked on over the > spring/summer based on a feedback from the array vendors after > discussions we started at LSF/MM. Generally speaking, their comments > didn't make things easier, nor prettier :( But your two bio approach is > a requirement to accommodate those needs (token-based copy) so I'll work > on consolidating your changes with mine. > > That said, we still need Mike Christie's patches to go in first. > > Mike: What's your status? I'm afraid I didn't get a chance to dig very > deep in your series since it coincided with me scrambling to sort out > SCSI for 4.4. Do you think there's a chance we could get your patches in > shape for 4.5? Is there an up-to-date tree I can look at? > It looks like my original mail did not make it due to an attachment. I just had 2 review comments left: 1. Originally, I had left REQ_FLUSH a flag. Christoph suggested to break it up into a op and flag: http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=144689113106515&w=2 I started this and messed up Was going to retry next week. 2. Start REQ_OP_READ off at non-zero to try and shake out code that was not converted. There are a several places where we assume reads are zero and writes are 1 for things like indexing in arrays (like blktrace's ddir_act or dm starts), passing into block functions (like nvme_alloc_request's call of blk_mq_alloc_request), and if/else's. I am not done fixing all of them and testing. Ok, 3 comments. One I gave myself: 3. Also, the btrfs patch is really large (1000 lines) because that code base is so large and there were so many places we passed around rw to through multiple functions. I wanted to try and break it up, so it would be easier for those guys to review. I uploaded a git tree here: https://github.com/mikechristie/kernel.git The patches are in the for-next-req-op. I made this over Jens's for-next branch in his linux-block tree. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-block" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
