Re: [PATCH V3 0/3] block/dm: support bio polling

From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
	Jeffle Xu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com>,
	dm-devel@redhat.com, Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/3] block/dm: support bio polling
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2022 11:27:44 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yhz4AGXcn0DUeSwq@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210623074032.1484665-1-ming.lei@redhat.com>

On Wed, Jun 23 2021 at  3:40P -0400,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com> wrote:

> Hello Guys,
> 
> Based on Christoph's bio based polling model[1], implement DM bio polling
> with one very simple approach.
> 
> Patch 1 adds helper of blk_queue_poll().
> 
> Patch 2 adds .bio_poll() callback to block_device_operations, so bio
> driver can implement its own logic for io polling.
> 
> Patch 3 implements bio polling for device mapper.
> 
> 
> V3:
> 	- patch style change as suggested by Christoph(2/3)
> 	- fix kernel panic issue caused by nested dm polling, which is found
> 	  & figured out by Jeffle Xu (3/3)
> 	- re-organize setup polling code (3/3)
> 	- remove RFC
> 
> V2:
> 	- drop patch to add new fields into bio
> 	- support io polling for dm native bio splitting
> 	- add comment
> 
> Ming Lei (3):
>   block: add helper of blk_queue_poll
>   block: add ->poll_bio to block_device_operations
>   dm: support bio polling
> 
>  block/blk-core.c         |  18 +++---
>  block/blk-sysfs.c        |   4 +-
>  block/genhd.c            |   2 +
>  drivers/md/dm-table.c    |  24 +++++++
>  drivers/md/dm.c          | 131 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  drivers/nvme/host/core.c |   2 +-
>  include/linux/blkdev.h   |   2 +
>  7 files changed, 170 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 2.31.1
> 

Hey Ming,

I'd like us to follow-through with adding bio-based polling support.
Kind of strange none of us that were sent this V3 ever responded,
sorry about that!

Do you have interest in rebasing this patchset (against linux-dm.git's
"dm-5.18" branch since there has been quite some churn)?  Or are you
OK with me doing the rebase?

thanks,
Mike