Re: [patch 1/2]block: handle merged discard request

[Mike Snitzer]

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 11:46 PM, Martin K. Petersen
<martin.petersen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>> "Christoph" == Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>>> There are several additional commands in the pipeline where the 1:1
>>> mapping between DMA size and block range is invalid. I want to get
>>> rid of the 1:1 assumption in general so we can handle any command
>>> without these evil workarounds.
>
> Christoph> What's the progress on getting these issues sorted out?
>
> This has bitrotted for a while. I'll put it on my list. I should finally
> have some bandwidth again next week...

Hey Martin,

I rebased (and fixed/tested) your writesame patches on v3.6-rc2 +
jens' for-linus branch, the git tree is available here:
https://github.com/snitm/linux/tree/writesame

I've also made the updated patchset available here:
http://people.redhat.com/msnitzer/patches/upstream/writesame/series.html

Should the writesame patches come before any discard merge or 1:1 DMA
and block range assumption fixes?
NOTE (for others besides martin):
http://people.redhat.com/msnitzer/patches/upstream/writesame/0001-block-Clean-up-merge-logic.patch
removes all the discard merge hacks; I think it provides a clean
baseline to then layer discard merge support back in -- but maybe
that's a flawed strategy?

Could be I've wasted a few hours by rebasing these patches...
regardless, it would be great if you could share what your plans are.

Thanks!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/