Hi Bart
On 05/14/2018 12:03 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-05-14 at 09:37 +0800, jianchao.wang wrote:
>> In addition, on a 64bit system, how do you set up the timer with a 32bit
>> deadline ?
>
> If timeout handling occurs less than (1 << 31) / HZ seconds after a request
> has been
On Mon, 2018-05-14 at 09:37 +0800, jianchao.wang wrote:
> In addition, on a 64bit system, how do you set up the timer with a 32bit
> deadline ?
If timeout handling occurs less than (1 << 31) / HZ seconds after a request has
been
submitted then a 32-bit variable is sufficient to store the
Hi bart
On 05/11/2018 11:29 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-05-11 at 14:35 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> It should be due to union blk_deadline_and_state.
>>> +union blk_deadline_and_state {
>>> + struct {
>>> + uint32_t generation:30;
>>> + uint32_t
Hi Bart
On 05/11/2018 11:26 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> The bug is in the above trace_printk() call: blk_rq_deadline() must only be
> used
> for the legacy block layer and not for blk-mq code. If you have a look at the
> value
> of the das.deadline field then one can see that the value of that
