Re: [PATCH 2/5] virtio_blk: implement REQ_FLUSH/FUA support

[Tejun Heo]

Hello,

On 08/16/2010 08:33 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 06:52:00PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> From: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Remove now unused REQ_HARDBARRIER support and implement REQ_FLUSH/FUA
>> support instead.  A new feature flag VIRTIO_BLK_F_FUA is added to
>> indicate the support for FUA.
> 
> I'm not sure it's worth it.  The pure REQ_FLUSH path works not and is
> well tested with kvm/qemu.   We can still easily add a FUA bit, and
> even a pre-flush bit if the protocol roundtrips matter in real life
> benchmarking.

Hmmm... the underlying storage could be md/dm RAIDs in which case FUA
should be cheaper than FLUSH.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/