From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935175AbcKDOqT (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Nov 2016 10:46:19 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:41113 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934104AbcKDOqR (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Nov 2016 10:46:17 -0400 Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 07:46:14 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Jens Axboe Cc: Shaohua Li , Christoph Hellwig , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kernel-team@fb.com Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] blk-mq: immediately dispatch big size request Message-ID: <20161104144614.GA18373@infradead.org> References: <05e8cb8c7e09903c7db36e81a6bbd0b39b24deff.1478217670.git.shli@fb.com> <6297c9a39cf21c94c65d5a9b3a19e54ba5b8b573.1478217671.git.shli@fb.com> <20161104000954.GA10266@infradead.org> <20161104001353.GA58908@omida-mbp.local.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <32bef0f6-c194-e31e-3a85-5aa21a6e81a4@fb.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <32bef0f6-c194-e31e-3a85-5aa21a6e81a4@fb.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 10:00:58PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > I've applied 1-2 for 4.10, but we probably should look into unifying > those parts of sq and mq in general. For instance, it doesn't seem to > make a lot of sense why we'd depth limit sq and not mq. I've spent some time looking the the make_request_fn and to be honest I think that whole sq vs mq split is pointless. They are about 70-80% the same anyway, and I think everyone would be served much better by merging them.