On 12/04/2019 09:42 AM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 09:26:52AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 10:24:32AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>> It'd be great to fix this universally in the kernel but it seems like >>> that patch is in discussion for now, and TBH I don't see any real >>> drawbacks to looping in mkfs - it would also solve the problem on any >>> old kernel w/o the block layer change. >> >> The problem is that we throw out efficiency for no good reason. > > True... > >>> I'd propose that we go ahead w/ the mkfs change, and if/when the kernel >>> handles this better, and it's reasonable to expect that we're running > > How do we detect that the kernel will handle it better? > >>> on a kernel where it can be interrupted, we could remove the mkfs loop >>> at a later date if we wanted to. >> >> I'd rather not touch mkfs if a trivial kernel patch handles the issue. > > Did some version of Tetsuo's patch even make it for 5.5? It seemed to > call submit_bio_wait from within a blk_plug region, which seems way > worse. > It did not yet, I can ping on the series with reference to this discussion. > --D >
