Re: [PATCH BUGFIX] block: make elevator_get robust against cross blk/blk-mq choice

[Omar Sandoval]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 07:58:22AM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> While we're at the topic:
> 
> Can't we use the same names for legacy and mq scheduler?
> It's quite an unnecessary complication to have
> 'noop', 'deadline', and 'cfq' for legacy, but 'none' and 'mq-deadline'
> for mq. If we could use 'noop' and 'deadline' for mq, too, the existing
> settings or udev rules will continue to work and we wouldn't get any
> annoying and pointless warnings here...

I mentioned this to Jens a little while ago but I didn't feel strongly
enough to push the issue. I also like this idea -- it makes the
transition to blk-mq a little more transparent.