> Il giorno 16 mag 2017, alle ore 15:38, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> ha scritto: > > [...] > >>>>> What about those two (Kconfig) patches which is in your current >>>>> bfq-4.11.y patchset. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I'm not sure I fully understand the purpose of the two patches you >>>> propose (in your following emails). The first patch seems to move BFQ >>>> config options to a different position in Kconfig.iosched, but the >>>> position of those items should be irrelevant. Am I missing something? >>>> The second patch seems to have to do with configuration bits of bfq >>>> for blk, yet such a bfq version is not available in mainline. >>>> >>>> In any case, for possible new submissions, you should inline your >>>> patches. For complete instructions on submitting patches, have a look >>>> at Documentation/process/submitting-patches >>>> >>> >>> All my testings was done with your patchset against Linux v4.11.y. >>> You have the same kconfig/kbuild stuff in your 0001 patch [1], so :-)? >>> What you have in 0001 is missing in Linux v4.12-rc1. >>> Not sure if this is intended. >> >> 4.12-rc1 contains bfq for blk-mq, while the patch you mention is for >> bfq for blk (never accepted in mainline). Maybe you could get a >> clearer idea by having a look at the commits that add bfq (for blk-mq) >> in 4.12-rc1. >> > > I recall, Markus pointed me to that difference between the BFQ implementations. > For testing purposes: You want people to test BFQ in Linux v4.12? > That would be awesome. For the moment, I would be very happy even if it just didn't crash! Thanks, Paolo > - Sedat - > >> Hope this helps, >> Paolo >> >>> I will re-submit and add a "4.12" in the subject-line when I am at home. >>> >>> - Sedat - >>> >>> [1] http://algo.ing.unimo.it/people/paolo/disk_sched/patches/4.11.0-v8r11/0001-block-cgroups-kconfig-build-bits-for-BFQ-v7r11-4.11..patch >>
