xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 41/42] block: do not use REQ_FLUSH for tracking flush support

To: mchristi@xxxxxxxxxx, 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
Subject: Re: [PATCH 41/42] block: do not use REQ_FLUSH for tracking flush support
From: Juergen Gross <kernel@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:50:39 +0200
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1460716802-2294-42-git-send-email-mchristi@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1460716802-2294-1-git-send-email-mchristi@xxxxxxxxxx> <1460716802-2294-42-git-send-email-mchristi@xxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.0
On 15/04/16 12:40, mchristi@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Mike Christie <mchristi@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> The last patch added a REQ_OP_FLUSH for request_fn drivers
> and the next patch renames REQ_FLUSH to REQ_PREFLUSH which
> will be used by file systems and make_request_fn drivers so
> they can send a write/flush combo.
> 
> This patch drops xen's use of REQ_FLUSH to track if it supports
> REQ_OP_FLUSH requests, so REQ_FLUSH can be deleted.
> 
> v6:
> - Dropped parts of patch handled by Jens's QUEUE_FLAG_WC/FUA
> patches and modified patch to check feature_flush/fua bits.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mike Christie <mchristi@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c | 47 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
>  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c b/drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c
> index f01691a..d6429e7 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c

...

> @@ -985,24 +981,22 @@ static int xlvbd_init_blk_queue(struct gendisk *gd, u16 
> sector_size,
>       return 0;
>  }
>  
> -static const char *flush_info(unsigned int feature_flush)
> +static const char *flush_info(struct blkfront_info *info)
>  {
> -     switch (feature_flush & ((REQ_FLUSH | REQ_FUA))) {
> -     case REQ_FLUSH|REQ_FUA:
> +     if (info->feature_flush && info->feature_fua)
>               return "barrier: enabled;";
> -     case REQ_FLUSH:
> +     else if (info->feature_fua)

Shouldn't this test feature_flush?

>               return "flush diskcache: enabled;";
> -     default:
> +     else
>               return "barrier or flush: disabled;";
> -     }
>  }
>  
>  static void xlvbd_flush(struct blkfront_info *info)
>  {
> -     blk_queue_write_cache(info->rq, info->feature_flush & REQ_FLUSH,
> -                             info->feature_flush & REQ_FUA);
> +     blk_queue_write_cache(info->rq, info->feature_flush ? true : false,
> +                           info->feature_flush ? true : false);

And here the second test should be feature_fua?

>       pr_info("blkfront: %s: %s %s %s %s %s\n",
> -             info->gd->disk_name, flush_info(info->feature_flush),
> +             info->gd->disk_name, flush_info(info),
>               "persistent grants:", info->feature_persistent ?
>               "enabled;" : "disabled;", "indirect descriptors:",
>               info->max_indirect_segments ? "enabled;" : "disabled;");


Juergen

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