,
I'd ideally like to take it all the way where the driver just asks for a
number of vecs through a nice API that takes care of all this. Lots of
duplicated code in drivers for this these days, and it's a mess.
--
Jens Axboe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubs
pointer
> in the request structure, e.g. like in the (completely untested) patch
> below.
ctx was meant to be private, unfortunately it's leaked a bit into other
parts of block/. But it's still private within that, at least.
Lets not add more stuff to struct request, it's already wa
On 09/19/2014 11:30 AM, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> On 9/19/2014 6:38 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 09/19/2014 09:35 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>>> On 09/19/14 17:27, Ming Lei wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:21 PM, Bart Van Assche
>>>> wrot
ake things worse (interrupt load, etc). For your
specific case or 4 queues, it probably DOES make sense to use them all,
however.
--
Jens Axboe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
where the tag number is just some
arbitrary "cookie". So for SCSI it should work, and I don't think we
need it anywhere else.
Alternatively, we can wrap tag retrieval in some function to mask off
the queue prefix for the cases where we just want an index.
--
Jens Axboe
--
To u
On 2014-09-22 10:31, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 2014-09-22 10:25, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 22/09/2014 8:37, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
One thing that is missing is generation multiqueue-aware tags at the
blk-mq level, which should be as simple as always adding a queue
prefix in the tag allocation
On 2014-10-01 10:08, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 09/19/14 17:38, Jens Axboe wrote:
ctx was meant to be private, unfortunately it's leaked a bit into other
parts of block/. But it's still private within that, at least.
Lets not add more stuff to struct request, it's already wa
On 10/02/2014 10:45 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 10/01/14 18:54, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> Lets get rid of the blk_mq_tag struct and just have it be an u32 or
>> something. We could potentially typedef it, but I'd prefer to just have
>> it be an unsigned 32-bit int.
>
On 2014-10-03 07:01, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 10/02/14 18:55, Jens Axboe wrote:
Sure, that's fine as well, but the function needs a more descriptive
name. I try to think of it like I have never looked at the code and need
to write a driver, it's a lot easier if the functions
If the number of HWQ's is a multiple of the number of CPU sockets
> it is now guaranteed that all CPU cores associated with a single
> HWQ reside on the same CPU socket.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche
> Reviewed-by: Sagi Grimberg
> Cc: Jens Axboe
> Cc: Christoph H
10 matches
Mail list logo
