Re: [PATCH v3 01/18] block: introduce duration-limits priority class

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

 



On 1/24/23 11:27, Bart Van Assche wrote:
Implementing duration limit support using the I/O priority mechanism makes it impossible to configure the I/O priority for commands that have a duration limit. Shouldn't the duration limit be independent of the I/O priority? Am I perhaps missing something?

(replying to my own e-mail)

In SAM-6 I found the following: "The device server may use the duration expiration time to determine the order of processing commands with the SIMPLE task attribute within the task set. A difference in duration expiration time between commands may override other scheduling considerations (e.g., different times to access different logical block addresses or vendor specific scheduling considerations). Processing of a collection of commands with different command duration limit settings should cause a command with an earlier duration expiration time to complete with status sooner than a command with a later duration expiration time."

Do I understand correctly that it is optional for a SCSI device to interpret the command duration as a priority and that this is not mandatory?

Thanks,

Bart.




[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