Re: [PATCH RFC] dm snapshot: shared exception store

[Daniel Phillips <phillips@phunq.net>]

On Tuesday 12 August 2008 16:29, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 08:24:41 +0900
> FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:00:36 -0700
> > Daniel Phillips <phillips@phunq.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Tuesday 12 August 2008 06:14, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > > > >  You just want to use getblk for alloc_chunk_buffer,
> > > > > not vmalloc.
> > > > 
> > > > I think that it means that we cache all the chunks, both btree chunks
> > > > and the data chunks (which are passed to the upper layer such as file
> > > > systems). I think that we don't want cache the latter in dm.
> > > 
> > > That is true.  However your code should not be reading data chunks into
> > > memory at all.  The only time the snapshot code has to read a data
> > > chunk is when performing the copy from origin to snapshot store in
> > > make_unique.  Your code does not directly perform this task as far as I
> > > can see.  That would be done in a part of the dm snapshot code your
> > > patch does not touch, which I seem to recall uses the kcopyd mechanism.
> > 
> > Yes, dm-snapshot doesn't access to data chunks. However, dm does for
> > dm-snapshot (by using submit_bio friends). So if dm-snapshot uses
> > __getblk, we use both __getblk and submit_bio with a single device at
> > the same time. I think that it's the right thing.
> 
> Oops, I meant, I don't think that it's the right thing.

Sure, it is perfectly ok.

Regards,

Daniel