Re: [PATCH v2] fs: Add aio iopriority support for block_dev

On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 02:24:58PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:

On 5/3/18 2:15 PM, Adam Manzanares wrote:

quoted

On 5/3/18 11:33 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:

quoted

Or we could just make ki_hint a u8 or u16 ... seems unlikely we'll need
32 bits of ki_hint.  (currently defined values are 1-5)

I like the approach of using a u16 for the ki_hint. I'll update and 
resubmit.

It's intended to be a mask. If you do shrink it for now, then we need some
guard code to ensure it can always carry what it needs to.

ummm ...

enum rw_hint {
        WRITE_LIFE_NOT_SET      = 0,
        WRITE_LIFE_NONE         = RWH_WRITE_LIFE_NONE,
        WRITE_LIFE_SHORT        = RWH_WRITE_LIFE_SHORT,
...

                .ki_hint = file_write_hint(filp),

static inline enum rw_hint file_write_hint(struct file *file)

#define RWF_WRITE_LIFE_NOT_SET  0
#define RWH_WRITE_LIFE_NONE     1
#define RWH_WRITE_LIFE_SHORT    2
#define RWH_WRITE_LIFE_MEDIUM   3
#define RWH_WRITE_LIFE_LONG     4
#define RWH_WRITE_LIFE_EXTREME  5

It doesn't look like it's being used as a mask.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-aio' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux AIO,
see: http://www.kvack.org/aio/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org">aart@kvack.org</a>