On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 2:20 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 10:50 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > I suppose to make the submission non-blocking, all operations that
> > currently block in the submission path may have to be changed first.
> >
> > For the case of a partition switch (same for retune), I suppose
> > something like this can be done:
> >
> > - in queue_rq() check whether a partition switch is needed. If not,
> > submit the current rq
> > - if a partition switch is needed, submit the partition switch cmd
> > instead, and return busy status
> > - when the completion arrives for the partition switch, call back into
> > blk_mq to have it call queue_rq again.
> >
> > Or possibly even (this might not be possible without signifcant
> > restructuring):
> >
> > - when preparing a request that would require a partition switch,
> > insert another meta-request to switch the partition ahead of it.
> >
> > I do realize that this is a significant departure from how it was done
> > in the past, but it seems cleaner that way to me.
>
> This partition business really need a proper overhaul.
>
> I outlined the work elsewhere but the problem is that the
> eMMC "partitions" such as boot partitions and the usecase-defined
> "general" partition (notice SD cards do not have this problem)
> are badly integrated with the Linux partition manager.
I think that's a totally orthogonal problem though: we may
well be able to come up with a different way of representing
the extra partitions to user space or as separate block devices,
but in the end, this looks exactly the same to mm
->queue_rq() callback. If we have send a cmd to one partition
and want to send the next cmd to another partition, we first
have to send the partition switch cmd.
Arnd
