lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Aug]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [patch 1/2]block: handle merged discard request
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 11:46 PM, Martin K. Petersen
<martin.petersen@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "Christoph" == Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> writes:
>
>>> There are several additional commands in the pipeline where the 1:1
>>> mapping between DMA size and block range is invalid. I want to get
>>> rid of the 1:1 assumption in general so we can handle any command
>>> without these evil workarounds.
>
> Christoph> What's the progress on getting these issues sorted out?
>
> This has bitrotted for a while. I'll put it on my list. I should finally
> have some bandwidth again next week...

Hey Martin,

I rebased (and fixed/tested) your writesame patches on v3.6-rc2 +
jens' for-linus branch, the git tree is available here:
https://github.com/snitm/linux/tree/writesame

I've also made the updated patchset available here:
http://people.redhat.com/msnitzer/patches/upstream/writesame/series.html

Should the writesame patches come before any discard merge or 1:1 DMA
and block range assumption fixes?
NOTE (for others besides martin):
http://people.redhat.com/msnitzer/patches/upstream/writesame/0001-block-Clean-up-merge-logic.patch
removes all the discard merge hacks; I think it provides a clean
baseline to then layer discard merge support back in -- but maybe
that's a flawed strategy?

Could be I've wasted a few hours by rebasing these patches...
regardless, it would be great if you could share what your plans are.

Thanks!


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-08-18 05:41    [W:0.101 / U:0.180 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site