Re: [PATCH BUGFIX] block: make elevator_get robust against cross blk/blk-mq choice
From: Hannes Reinecke
Date: Tue Feb 14 2017 - 02:11:54 EST
On 02/14/2017 08:07 AM, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> 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.
And saves us _a lot_ of support cases :-)
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Teamlead Storage & Networking
hare@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)