From: Joe Thornber <thornber@redhat.com>
To: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>,
"Alasdair G. Kergon" <agk@redhat.com>,
dm-devel@redhat.com
Subject: Re: Review of dm-block-manager.c
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 14:29:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110802132859.GA28866@ubuntu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110802130755.GA26994@ubuntu>
On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 02:07:55PM +0100, Joe Thornber wrote:
> There isn't that degree of parallelism. We can't have multiple
> threads pulling the cache in different directions for performance
> reasons. So we have multiple threads that use this in a non-blocking
> mode. ie. they use the try_lock variants, and only get the data if
> it's already available in the cache. If the non-blocking requests
> failed then it gets passed across for a worker thread to deal with.
> This is the only thread that updates the cache. There is no issue
> here.
In fact because we have only a single mutator the block recycling
concerns are not an issue for thinp, though they should still be
fixed.
- Joe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-02 13:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-01 21:00 Review of dm-block-manager.c Mikulas Patocka
2011-08-01 21:17 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-08-02 0:15 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-08-02 0:30 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-08-02 13:07 ` Joe Thornber
2011-08-02 13:29 ` Joe Thornber [this message]
2011-08-02 14:36 ` [PATCH 1/4] The return code from the various wait functions is never acted upon. So change to uninterrupible waits and change the return type to void Joe Thornber
2011-08-02 14:36 ` [PATCH 2/4] Fix a race between reading a new block and having it recycled Joe Thornber
2011-08-03 14:53 ` Mikulas Patocka
2011-08-02 14:36 ` [PATCH 3/4] [block-manager] remove spurious decrement of write_lock_pending in the case of a recycled block Joe Thornber
2011-08-03 14:50 ` Mikulas Patocka
2011-08-04 9:06 ` Joe Thornber
2011-08-02 14:36 ` [PATCH 4/4] Track errored blocks Joe Thornber
2011-08-03 15:00 ` Mikulas Patocka
2011-08-03 14:42 ` [PATCH 1/4] The return code from the various wait functions is never acted upon. So change to uninterrupible waits and change the return type to void Mikulas Patocka
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=20110802132859.GA28866@ubuntu \
--to=thornber@redhat.com \
--cc=agk@redhat.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=mpatocka@redhat.com \
/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.