From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, chris.mason@oracle.com,
hch@infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] new ->perform_write fop
Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 11:15:18 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100521151518.GA12752@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100514072219.GC4706@laptop>
Nick, what exactly is the problem with the reserve + allocate design?
In a delalloc filesystem (which is all those that will care about high
performance large writes) the write path fundamentally consists of those
two operations. Getting rid of the get_blocks mess and replacing it
with a dedicated operations vector will simplify things a lot.
Punching holes is a rather problematic operation, and as mentioned not
actually implemented for most filesystems - just decrementing counters
on errors increases the chances that our error handling will actually
work massively.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-21 15:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-12 21:24 [RFC] new ->perform_write fop Josef Bacik
2010-05-13 1:39 ` Josef Bacik
2010-05-13 15:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-05-14 1:00 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-14 3:30 ` Josef Bacik
2010-05-14 5:50 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-14 7:20 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-14 7:33 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-14 6:41 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-14 7:22 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-14 8:38 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-14 13:33 ` Chris Mason
2010-05-18 6:36 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-18 8:05 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-18 10:43 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-18 10:43 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-18 12:27 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-18 12:27 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-18 15:09 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-19 23:50 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-20 6:48 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-20 20:12 ` Jan Kara
2010-05-20 23:05 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-21 9:05 ` Steven Whitehouse
2010-05-21 13:50 ` Josef Bacik
2010-05-21 13:50 ` Josef Bacik
2010-05-21 14:23 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-21 15:19 ` Josef Bacik
2010-05-24 3:29 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-22 0:31 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-21 18:58 ` Jan Kara
2010-05-22 0:27 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-24 9:20 ` Jan Kara
2010-05-24 9:33 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-05 15:05 ` tytso
2010-06-06 7:59 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-06 7:59 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-21 15:15 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2010-05-22 2:31 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-22 8:37 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-24 3:09 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-24 5:53 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-24 6:55 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-24 10:21 ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-01 6:27 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-24 18:40 ` Joel Becker
2010-05-17 23:35 ` Jan Kara
2010-05-18 1:21 ` Dave Chinner
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=20100521151518.GA12752@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=josef@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.