Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Jun 2004 10:17:01 -0600 | From | "Eric D. Mudama" <> | Subject | Re: flush cache range proposal (was Re: ide errors in 7-rc1-mm1 and later) |
| |
On Fri, Jun 11 at 9:55, Jens Axboe wrote: >Proposal looks fine, but please lets not forget that flush cache range >is really a band-aid because we don't have a proper ordered write in the >first place. Personally, I'd much rather see that implemented than flush >cache range. It would be way more effective.
So something like:
WRITE FIRST PARTY DMA QUEUED BARRIER EXT READ FIRST PARTY DMA QUEUED BARRIER EXT READ DMA QUEUED BARRIER EXT READ DMA QUEUED BARRIER WRITE DMA QUEUED BARRIER WRITE DMA QUEUED BARRIER EXT
...
If the drive receives a queued barrier write (NCQ or Legacy), it will finish processing all previously-received queued commands and post good status for them, then it will process the barrier operation, post status for that barrier operation, then it will continue processing queued commands in the order received.
Multiple barrier operations can be in the queue at the same time. A barrier operation has an implied FUA associated with it, such that the command (and all previous-in-time commands) must be pushed to the media before command completetion can be indicated.
Is that what would be most useful?
--eric
-- Eric D. Mudama edmudama@mail.bounceswoosh.org
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |