> > Barriers are pretty much universal as you need them for power off !
>
> I'm afraid, no storage (drives, if you like this term more) at the moment
> supports
> barriers and, as far as I know the storage history, has never supported.
The ATA cache flush is a write barrier, and given you have
> Isn't any type of kernel-side ordering an exercise in futility, since
>a) the kernel has no knowledge of the disk's actual geometry
>b) most drives will internally re-order requests anyway
They will but only as permitted by the commands queued, so you have some
control depending upon
> How about that recently preliminary infrastructure to send ORDERED commands
> instead of queue draining was deleted from the kernel, because "there's no
> difference where to drain the queue, on the kernel or the storage side"?
Send patches.
Alan
> I don't want to flame on this topic, but you are not right here. As far as I
> can
> see, a big chunk of Linux storage and file system developers are/were
> employed by
> the "gold-plated storage" manufacturers, starting from FusionIO, SGI and
> Oracle.
>
> You know, RedHat from recent
> > Hopefully, eventually the storage developers will realize the value
> > behind ordered commands and learn corresponding SCSI facilities to
> > deal with them.
>
> Eventually, drive manufacturers will realize that trying to price
> guage people who want advanced features such as TCQ, DIF/DIX,
5 matches
Mail list logo
