On 09/04/2017 04:48 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 4 September 2017 at 09:06, Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 01/09/17 16:28, Adrian Hunter wrote: >>> On 01/09/17 15:58, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>>> + Christoph >>>> >>>> On 1 September 2017 at 13:42, Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> On 31/08/17 14:56, Adrian Hunter wrote: >>>>>> Here is V7 of the hardware command queue patches without the software >>>>>> command queue patches, now using blk-mq. >>>>>> >>>>>> HW CMDQ offers 25% - 50% better random multi-threaded I/O. I see a slight >>>>>> 2% drop in sequential read speed but no change to sequential write. >>>>> >>>>> Any comments? >>>> >>>> A couple of overall comments, for now. >>>> >>>> To make sure we don't overlook something when converting to mq, I >>>> would prefer that we first convert the existing mmc block code to mq, >>>> then we add CMDQ on top. >>> >>> That doesn't make sense. This patch set is not converting the legacy driver >>> to mq therefore it cannot overlook anything for converting to mq. >> >> And then you go silent again. > > We have weekends in Sweden - and I also work on other things than mmc :-). > > I do however admit, that I could have been reviewing a bit faster > throughout the re-spins. Apologize for that, but I am only doing my > best. > >> >> I can send blk-mq support for legacy requests in a few days if you like, but >> I want to hear a better explanation of why you are delaying CQE support. > > That would be very nice, however be aware of that we are in the merge > window, so I am not picking new material for 4.14 from this point. I > assume you understand why. Nope. This is new functionality - doesn't affect anyone who doesn't have a command queue engine. Next to no chance of regressions. Tested by several in the community. Substantially unchanged since February. It is not even very much code in the block driver. > > Still, big changes is always nice to queue up early for a release > cycle. Let's aim for that! You said that in February. Never happened. You said you wanted blk-mq, so I waited to re-base on top, but it never appeared. > Moreover, I am not delaying CQE, but really want it to be merged asap! > However, I am also having the role as a maintainer and the things that > comes with it. For example, I would like the community to reach > consensus around how to move forward with CQE, before I decide to pick > it up. It has been more than 6 months. That is enough time to wait for "consensus".
