From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
Cc: darrick.wong@oracle.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: stop using ioends for direct write completions
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 17:42:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160202164237.GA25436@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160202153117.GB1853@bfoster.bfoster>
On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 10:31:18AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> FWIW, I don't see any such review comments against the three versions of
> the "DIO needs an ioend for writes" patch I have in my mailbox, but I
> easily could have missed something..? But if there wasn't time, then
> fair enough.
I'll have to look at the mailboxes, but I remember Dave sending this
out and complaining.
> I'm just looking for context. I don't have much of an opinion on which
> approach is used here. If it simplifies COW, then that seems good enough
> reason to me to take this approach. I'm pointing this out more because
> this code seems to have been rewritten the last couple of times we
> needed to fix something, which makes backports particularly annoying.
> The two patches above were associated with a broader enhancement and a
> bug fix (respectively) as a sort of justification, whereas this post had
> a much more vague purpose from what I could tell, and therefore why I at
> least hadn't taken the time to review it.
>
> If COW is the primary motivator, perhaps we can bundle it with that
> work?
The prime motivator is to:
(1) avoid a pointless memory allocation
(2) avoid a pointless context switch
(3) avoid pointless code complexity
COW is just another case where these show up.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-02 16:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-14 10:10 stop using ioends for direct write completions Christoph Hellwig
2016-01-14 10:10 ` [PATCH] xfs: don't use " Christoph Hellwig
2016-01-28 13:16 ` stop using " Christoph Hellwig
2016-01-28 20:53 ` Darrick J. Wong
2016-01-28 21:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-01-28 21:58 ` Darrick J. Wong
2016-01-28 22:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-01-28 22:31 ` Darrick J. Wong
2016-01-29 8:01 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-01-29 14:12 ` Brian Foster
2016-02-01 21:54 ` Darrick J. Wong
2016-02-02 11:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-02-02 15:26 ` Brian Foster
2016-02-02 11:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-02-02 15:31 ` Brian Foster
2016-02-02 16:42 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2016-02-03 22:22 ` 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=20160202164237.GA25436@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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.