Re: [PATCH v4 02/10] block, scsi: Give RQF_PREEMPT back its original meaning

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 01:54:40PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-08-06 at 08:27 +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> > I am not sure this is going to work for SCSI parallel; we're using the
> > QUIESCE state there to do domain validation, and all commands there are
> > most definitely not PM requests.
> > Can you please validate your patches with eg aic7xxx and SCSI parallel
> > disks?
> 
> Hello Hannes,
> 
> How about using the RQF_PM flag for SCSI parallel requests instead of
> RQF_PREEMPT? That change will also avoid that RQF_PREEMPT has a double meaning.
> Anyway, I will see whether I can drop that change from this series and submit
> that change seperately.

One thing I'd like to do is split BLK_MQ_REQ_PREEMPT and RQF_PREEMPT,
that is don't set RQF_PREEMPT automatically when BLK_MQ_REQ_PREEMPT is
passed to blk_get_request, but let the caller set it manually.  After
that RQF_PREEMPT isn't used by the block layer itself at all and can
be moved into ide/scsi specific flags that we can use as we want.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [IDE]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux