Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 02/35] block: add REQ_OP definitions and bi_op/op fields

On 01/09/2016 06:56 PM, Mike Christie wrote:

On 01/09/2016 07:37 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

quoted

Seems like this is missing REQ_OP_FLUSH, which still hides as a write?

Oh yeah, to answer the second part of your question, REQ_OP_FLUSH is
only a flush operation like what request_fn drivers wanted.

REQ_PREFLUSH can be set with a REQ_OP_WRITE bio when filesystems want to
do both.

There is then the case where filesystems and blkdev_issue_flush could
just want to request a flush. I left them as a REQ_PREFLUSH with
REQ_OP_WRITE set, so there would be a single code path.

I might have misunderstood what you wanted or am misunderstanding you now.

I did not change the flush related code until the last patches. I added
REQ_OP_FLUSH in patch:

[PATCH 33/35] block, drivers: add REQ_OP_FLUSH operation
commit 18dea20363ba245a47bc1bb54f6465b8a05b19af
Author: Mike Christie [off-list ref]
Date:   Tue Jan 5 21:02:17 2016 -0600

    block, drivers: add REQ_OP_FLUSH operation


and I added the REQ_PREFLUSH flag in


[PATCH 35/35] block, drivers, fs: rename REQ_FLUSH to REQ_PREFLUSH
commit 303dc6a7cc3673065538ba041562fcd833a619af
Author: Mike Christie [off-list ref]
Date:   Thu Jan 7 18:17:03 2016 -0600

    block, drivers, fs: rename REQ_FLUSH to REQ_PREFLUSH


I did them in separate patches, because I was not sure if they were
correct with what you requested before, and because they were a little
more tricky because of how request_fn drivers, make_request_fn drivers,
and dm-multipath handle flushes differently.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs