Hello, Israel.
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 07:16:14PM +0300, Israel Rukshin wrote:
Just noticed this one, this looks interesting to me as well. Israel, can you run your test with this patch?
Yes, I just did and it looks good.
Awesome.
+++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h @@ -227,6 +227,8 @@ struct request { unsigned int extra_len; /* length of alignment and padding */ + bool missed_completion;
Would be nicer if we can flag this somewhere instead of adding a hole to struct request...
I missed it before. It's actually being put in an existing hole, so the struct size stays the same before and after. It's a bit of cheating cuz this is one of the two holes which can be removed by swapping two fields.
Re. making it a flag, regardless of whether this is a flag or a separate field, we need to add a new field because there currently is no field which can be modified by the party who doesn't own the request, so if we make it a flag, we need to add sth like unsigned long atom_flags.
Thanks.