On Tue, 2021-10-26 at 09:36 -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 10/26/21 12:12 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > The HPB support added this merge window is fundanetally flawed as > > it > ^^^^^^^^^^^^ > fundanetally -> > fundamentally > > Since the implementation can be reworked not to use > blk_insert_cloned_request() I'm not sure using the word > "fundamentally" is appropriate. I'm not so sure about that. The READ BUFFER implementation runs from a work queue and looks fine. The WRITE BUFFER implementation is trying to spawn a second command to precede the queued command which is a fundamental problem for the block API. It's not clear to me that the WRITE BUFFER can be fixed because of the tying to the sent command ... but like I said, the standard is proprietary so I can't look at it to see if there are alternative ways of achieving the same effect. James
