On 10/31/2017 08:03 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 07:53:03PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 31, 2017, at 7:46 PM, Ming Lei <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 02:29:32PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>>> On 10/26/2017 10:43 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
>>>>> Hi Jens,
>>>>>
>>>>> The 1st patch removes the RESTART for TAG-SHARED because SCSI handles it
>>>>> by itself, and not necessary to waste CPU to do the expensive RESTART.
>>>>> And Roman Pen reported that this RESTART cuts half of IOPS in his case.
>>>>>
>>>>> The 2nd patch removes the RESTART when .get_budget returns 
>>>>> BLK_STS_RESOURCE,
>>>>> and this RESTART is handled by SCSI's RESTART(scsi_end_request()) too.
>>>>
>>>> What base is this against?
>>>
>>> The for-next branch of your block tree:
>>
>> From when? Doesn’t apply at all today. 
> 
> I just tried today's for-next(top commit is 'MAINTAINERS: Remove Rafael from 
> Opal maintainers.'),
> and the two patches can be applied cleanly.
> 
> I guess you may try to apply the two patches against for-4.15/block,
> which doesn't include the patchset of '[PATCH V10 0/8] blk-mq-sched: improve 
> sequential I/O'[1]:
> 
>       https://marc.info/?t=150797316600002&r=1&w=2

I'm the idiot, for some reason that patchset got applied to for-next
directly. That's not supposed to happen, for-next is always just
a merge point. Fixed that up, and applied these two patches as
well.

-- 
Jens Axboe

Reply via email to