LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Robert Hancock <hancockr@shaw.ca>
Cc: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, edmudama@gmail.com,
Nicolas.Mailhot@LaPoste.net, Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Mark Lord <mlord@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: libata FUA revisited
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 09:44:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070221084427.GA3924@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <45D9FE7B.60909@shaw.ca>
On Mon, Feb 19 2007, Robert Hancock wrote:
> Jens Axboe wrote:
> >But we can't really change that, since you need the cache flushed before
> >issuing the FUA write. I've been advocating for an ordered bit for
> >years, so that we could just do:
> >
> >3. w/FUA+ORDERED
> >
> >normal operation -> barrier issued -> write barrier FUA+ORDERED
> > -> normal operation resumes
> >
> >So we don't have to serialize everything both at the block and device
> >level. I would have made FUA imply this already, but apparently it's not
> >what MS wanted FUA for, so... The current implementations take the FUA
> >bit (or WRITE FUA) as a hint to boost it to head of queue, so you are
> >almost certainly going to jump ahead of already queued writes. Which we
> >of course really do not.
>
> I think that FUA was designed for a different use case than what Linux
> is using barriers for currently. The advantage with FUA is when you have
[snip]
Yes that's pretty obvious, my point is just that FUA+ORDERED would be a
nice thing to have for us.
> >I'm not too nervous about the FUA write commands, I hope we can safely
> >assume that if you set the FUA supported bit in the id AND the write fua
> >command doesn't get aborted, that FUA must work. Anything else would
> >just be an immensely stupid implementation. NCQ+FUA is more tricky, I
> >agree that it being just a command bit does make it more likely that it
> >could be ignored. And that is indeed a danger. Given state of NCQ in
> >early firmware drives, I would not at all be surprised if the drive
> >vendors screwed that up too.
> >
> >But, since we don't have the ordered bit for NCQ/FUA anyway, we do need
> >to drain the drive queue before issuing the WRITE/FUA. And at that point
> >we may as well not use the NCQ command, just go for the regular non-NCQ
> >FUA write. I think that should be safe.
>
> Aside from the issue above, as I mentioned elsewhere, lots of NCQ drives
> don't support non-NCQ FUA writes..
"Lots" meaning how many? All the ones I have here support FUA.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-21 8:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <fa.S80SRyQbD/hm4SxliPUKU88BaCo@ifi.uio.no>
2007-02-12 5:47 ` Robert Hancock
[not found] ` <fa.Q/csgyCHkAsD84yi+bN78H1WNNM@ifi.uio.no>
2007-02-13 0:23 ` Robert Hancock
2007-02-13 15:20 ` Tejun Heo
2007-02-14 0:07 ` Robert Hancock
2007-02-14 0:50 ` Tejun Heo
2007-02-15 18:00 ` Jens Axboe
2007-02-19 19:46 ` Robert Hancock
2007-02-21 8:37 ` Tejun Heo
2007-02-21 8:46 ` Jens Axboe
2007-02-21 8:57 ` Tejun Heo
2007-02-21 9:01 ` Jens Axboe
2007-02-22 22:44 ` Ric Wheeler
2007-02-22 22:40 ` Ric Wheeler
2007-02-21 14:06 ` Robert Hancock
2007-02-22 22:34 ` Ric Wheeler
2007-02-23 0:04 ` Robert Hancock
2007-02-21 8:44 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2007-02-12 3:25 Robert Hancock
2007-02-12 8:31 ` Tejun Heo
2007-02-16 18:14 ` Jeff Garzik
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070221084427.GA3924@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=Nicolas.Mailhot@LaPoste.net \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=edmudama@gmail.com \
--cc=hancockr@shaw.ca \
--cc=htejun@gmail.com \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mlord@pobox.com \
--subject='Re: libata FUA revisited' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).