From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc: Xuewei Zhang <xueweiz@google.com>,
"James E . J . Bottomley" <jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Aditya Kali <adityakali@google.com>,
Guenter Roeck <groeck@chromium.org>,
maze@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: sd: Contribute to randomness when running rotational device
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 18:42:10 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180906224210.GK5098@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1536272873.26747.11.camel@acm.org>
On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 03:27:53PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>
> Although this patch looks fine to me, seeing this patch makes me wonder
> whether the default should be changed (QUEUE_FLAG_MQ_DEFAULT) instead of
> modifying the sd driver. Can anyone remind me why QUEUE_FLAG_MQ_DEFAULT does
> not include QUEUE_FLAG_ADD_RANDOM?
There was a discussion about a number of *years* ago; blk-mq has been
baking for a very long time. In the early days of block_mq, the
overwhelming percentage of the users of blk-mq where those who were
using PCIe attached flash. So when, I raised this question, the
argument was that SSD users have no entropy. Which I agree with; but
now that blk-mq is the default, and hard drives are using blk-mq, it's
time for a patch like Xuewei's.
Cheers,
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-06 22:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-06 20:37 [PATCH] scsi: sd: Contribute to randomness when running rotational device Xuewei Zhang
2018-09-06 22:27 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-09-06 22:42 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o [this message]
2018-09-06 23:03 ` Xuewei Zhang
2018-09-08 4:06 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-09-09 11:52 ` Ming Lei
2018-09-14 5:05 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
2018-09-17 6:58 ` Martin K. Petersen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180906224210.GK5098@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=adityakali@google.com \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=groeck@chromium.org \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=maze@google.com \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=xueweiz@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.