On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Adam Manzanares <adam.manzanares@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Patch adds an association between iocontext ioprio and the ioprio of a > request. This value is set in blk_rq_set_prio which takes the request and > the ioc as arguments. If the ioc is valid in blk_rq_set_prio then the > iopriority of the request is set as the iopriority of the ioc. In > init_request_from_bio a check is made to see if the ioprio of the bio is > valid and if so then the request prio comes from the bio. > > Signed-off-by: Adam Manzananares <adam.manzanares@xxxxxxx> > --- > block/blk-core.c | 4 +++- > include/linux/blkdev.h | 14 ++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c > index 14d7c07..361b1b9 100644 > --- a/block/blk-core.c > +++ b/block/blk-core.c > @@ -1153,6 +1153,7 @@ static struct request *__get_request(struct request_list *rl, int op, > > blk_rq_init(q, rq); > blk_rq_set_rl(rq, rl); > + blk_rq_set_prio(rq, ioc); > req_set_op_attrs(rq, op, op_flags | REQ_ALLOCED); > > /* init elvpriv */ > @@ -1656,7 +1657,8 @@ void init_request_from_bio(struct request *req, struct bio *bio) > > req->errors = 0; > req->__sector = bio->bi_iter.bi_sector; > - req->ioprio = bio_prio(bio); > + if (ioprio_valid(bio_prio(bio))) > + req->ioprio = bio_prio(bio); Should we use ioprio_best() here? If req->ioprio and bio_prio() disagree one side has explicitly asked for a higher priority. -- 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
