On Fri, Aug 08 2008, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > On Fri, 8 Aug 2008, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > > > On Fri, 8 Aug 2008, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Aug 08 2008, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > > > > On Fri, 8 Aug 2008 08:15:37 +0200 > > > > Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > BTW, we also wait for your verdict on: > > > > > > > > > > > > http://marc.info/?t=121611935500002&r=1&w=2 > > > > > > > > > > I've always hated the iommu virtual merging complexity. My plan is to > > > > > rip it out. > > > > > > > > No complaint from me. I'm just happy to see the verdict at length. > > > > > > Mikulas, you had a patch for this. Can you strip out the arch bits and > > > just send me the block bits? The arch bits should go in via the arch > > > maintainers. > > > > > > The iommu code may still do virtual merging, it would be silly not to do > > > that if possible. Now that later kernels expose the necessary parameters > > > at that level as well, it's perfectly feasible. > > > > Here I'm sending the first one, it removes virtual merge accounting from > > blk-merge.c (it acts as if all architectures undefined > > BIO_VMERGE_BOUNDARY). I also created second patch that removes > > bi_hw_segments field from struct bio and struct request. The next task > > would be to remove nr_hw_segments from the request_queue, but it will > > require changing the drivers. > > > > Mikulas > > (note: raid5 uses nr_hw_segments field for some other purpose, so this > patch will break it. It should be fixed by raid5 maintainers) > > Remove hw_segments field from struct bio and struct request. Without virtual > merge accounting they have no purpose. I have applied this and the previous, with a fixup to raid5 to overload both active stripe and process count in bi_phys_segments. -- Jens Axboe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
