xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 00/42] v7: separate operations from flags in the bio/request

To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/42] v7: separate operations from flags in the bio/request structs
From: Mike Christie <mchristi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 12:51:59 -0500
Cc: linux-f2fs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx, drbd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, philipp.reisner@xxxxxxxxxx, lars.ellenberg@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-raid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-bcache@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-block@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mtd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, target-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, osd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, ocfs2-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <x49d1p2c1nx.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1460747777-8479-1-git-send-email-mchristi@xxxxxxxxxx> <x49d1p2c1nx.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
On 05/03/2016 03:44 PM, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> mchristi@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
> 
>> The following patches begin to cleanup the request->cmd_flags and
>> bio->bi_rw mess. We currently use cmd_flags to specify the operation,
>> attributes and state of the request. For bi_rw we use it for similar
>> info and also the priority but then also have another bi_flags field
>> for state. At some point, we abused them so much we just made cmd_flags
>> 64 bits, so we could add more.
>>
>> The following patches seperate the operation (read, write discard,
>> flush, etc) from cmd_flags/bi_rw.
>>
>> This patchset was made against linux-next from today April 15
>> (git tag next-20160415).
>>
>> I put a git tree here:
>> https://github.com/mikechristie/linux-kernel.git
>> The patches are in the op branch.
> 
> Hi, Mike,
> 
> That git tree doesn't seem to exist.  I did manage to apply your patch
> set on top of next-20160415, though.
> 
> So... what testing did you do? ;-) I ran into the following problems

I normally run xfstests and run it on my daily workstation and laptop. I
did not do this for every FS this time and hit a regression.

What FS were you using?

> - git clone fails
> - yum segfaults


In v7/v6, I missed a new submit_bio call, so I hit issues like the two
above. I have this fixed in the next version.

> - many blktrace/blkparse issues, including incorrect cpu recorded in
>   traces, null task names, and blkparse outputting nothing for a trace
>   file several gigabytes in size.

I will double check for these issues.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>