On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 01:38:57PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 10/28/2013 10:57 AM, Shaohua Li wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > 2013/10/28 Jens Axboe mailto:ax...@kernel.dk>>
> >
> > On 10/28/2013 02:48 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 10:29:25PM +, Jens Axboe wrot
On 10/28/2013 01:30 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 10:59:32AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> The problem with it is that it will pass a tag number to the low level
>>> driver which it doesn't expect. In case the tags are used 1:1 as
>>> hardware tags that would lead to nasy b
On 10/28/2013 10:57 AM, Shaohua Li wrote:
>
>
>
> 2013/10/28 Jens Axboe mailto:ax...@kernel.dk>>
>
> On 10/28/2013 02:48 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 10:29:25PM +, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >> On Sat, Oct 26 2013, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >>> I think
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 10:59:32AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > The problem with it is that it will pass a tag number to the low level
> > driver which it doesn't expect. In case the tags are used 1:1 as
> > hardware tags that would lead to nasy bugs.
> >
> > At vefy least we'd need to mess with
On 10/28/2013 10:46 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 10:29:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> It's not that I think the existing patch is THAT bad, it fits in alright
>> with the reserved tagging and works regardless of whether a driver uses
>> reserved tags or not. And it does
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 10:29:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> It's not that I think the existing patch is THAT bad, it fits in alright
> with the reserved tagging and works regardless of whether a driver uses
> reserved tags or not. And it does have the upside of not requiring
> special checks or l
On 10/28/2013 02:48 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 10:29:25PM +, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 26 2013, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> I think this variant of the patch from Alexander should fix the issue
>>> in a minimally invasive way. Longer term I'd prefer to use q
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 10:29:25PM +, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 26 2013, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > I think this variant of the patch from Alexander should fix the issue
> > in a minimally invasive way. Longer term I'd prefer to use q->flush_rq
> > like in the non-mq case by copying ov
On Sat, Oct 26 2013, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> I think this variant of the patch from Alexander should fix the issue
> in a minimally invasive way. Longer term I'd prefer to use q->flush_rq
> like in the non-mq case by copying over the context and tag information.
This one is pretty simple, we c
I think this variant of the patch from Alexander should fix the issue
in a minimally invasive way. Longer term I'd prefer to use q->flush_rq
like in the non-mq case by copying over the context and tag information.
diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
index 3bb9e9f..9677c65 100644
---
I've just ran into an issue where I ran out of blk-mq tags on my virtio
setup on what appears a heavy fsync workload. When drilling it down it
seemed to be a tag leak. This reminded me of a commit I had seen in
the scsi-mq tree but never on any mailinglist (and neither in my Inbox
despite the Cc
11 matches
Mail list logo