lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [patch 1/2]block: handle merged discard request
From
2012/3/22 Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>:
>>>>>> "Shaohua" == Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org> writes:
>
> Shaohua> The SCSI discard implementation hacks the first bio of request
> Shaohua> to add payload, which makes blk_update_request() can't
> Shaohua> correctly mark bios finish.  The patch solves it. We set
> Shaohua> discard bio size to 0 and finish it after the hacked payload
> Shaohua> finishes.
>
> Ick!
>
> Also, you can't muck with bi_size because if we get an I/O error and
> have to reissue the command we no longer know how much to write.
> I have had to deal with the same issue for WRITE SAME. And the only sane
> approach is to distinguish between the DMA transfer size and the blocks
> "affected" by the command. That's what I'm working on right now for copy
> offload...
Yes, this is a problem. But note we already have this problem with
discard request for a long time. The payload has just (sector, length).
And looks the request finish returns the transfered data of the
payload instead of the discarded data. Am I missing anything?

> If this is something you want in 3.4 I guess we could temporarily add a
> separate length field to struct request. If you can wait I suggest we
> talk at LSF.
This blocked my raid discard patches, but I can wait. Sure we can have
a talk at LSF.

Thanks,
Shaohua
--
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-03-22 03:41    [W:0.064 / U:3.288 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site