Thread (2 messages) 2 messages, 2 authors, 2016-05-04

Re: [PATCH 00/42] v7: separate operations from flags in the bio/request structs

From: Jeff Moyer <hidden>
Date: 2016-05-03 20:44:02
Also in: dm-devel, linux-bcache, linux-block, linux-btrfs, linux-ext4, linux-f2fs-devel, linux-fsdevel, linux-scsi, linux-xfs, lkml, ocfs2-devel

mchristi-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org writes:
The following patches begin to cleanup the request->cmd_flags and
bio->bi_rw mess. We currently use cmd_flags to specify the operation,
attributes and state of the request. For bi_rw we use it for similar
info and also the priority but then also have another bi_flags field
for state. At some point, we abused them so much we just made cmd_flags
64 bits, so we could add more.

The following patches seperate the operation (read, write discard,
flush, etc) from cmd_flags/bi_rw.

This patchset was made against linux-next from today April 15
(git tag next-20160415).

I put a git tree here:
https://github.com/mikechristie/linux-kernel.git
The patches are in the op branch.
Hi, Mike,

That git tree doesn't seem to exist.  I did manage to apply your patch
set on top of next-20160415, though.

So... what testing did you do? ;-) I ran into the following problems:
- git clone fails
- yum segfaults
- many blktrace/blkparse issues, including incorrect cpu recorded in
  traces, null task names, and blkparse outputting nothing for a trace
  file several gigabytes in size.

After that, I decided to back out your patches and test the base
linux-next kernel.  That kernel has none of those issues.

So, either I'm missing some dependencies, or I think we've got some
issues to iron out before this thing goes in.  Before I dig any further,
am I missing something?

Cheers,
Jeff
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help