On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Hi Ming,
>
> thanks for doing this work!
>
> I've only taken a very cursory look at the series and I like most of it.
>
> But can you explain why you're not simply incrementing the number of
> allocated requests in the blk-mq request allo
Hi Ming,
thanks for doing this work!
I've only taken a very cursory look at the series and I like most of it.
But can you explain why you're not simply incrementing the number of
allocated requests in the blk-mq request allocation code instead of
allocating the flush request separately in the la
Hi,
As recent discussion, especially suggested by Christoph, this patchset
implements per-distpatch_queue flush machinery, so that:
- current init_request and exit_request callbacks can
cover flush request too, then the ugly and buggy copying
way of initializing flush requ
3 matches
Mail list logo
