From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.136]:50360 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751667AbdCAADG (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Feb 2017 19:03:06 -0500 Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 15:30:11 -0800 From: Shaohua Li To: Ming Lei Cc: Jens Axboe , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] md: prepare for managing resync I/O pages in clean way Message-ID: <20170228233011.rdqtde22zwsimbz7@kernel.org> References: <1488296503-4987-1-git-send-email-tom.leiming@gmail.com> <1488296503-4987-5-git-send-email-tom.leiming@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1488296503-4987-5-git-send-email-tom.leiming@gmail.com> Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 11:41:34PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > Now resync I/O use bio's bec table to manage pages, > this way is very hacky, and may not work any more > once multipage bvec is introduced. > > So introduce helpers and new data structure for > managing resync I/O pages more cleanly. > > Signed-off-by: Ming Lei > --- > drivers/md/md.h | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/md/md.h b/drivers/md/md.h > index 1d63239a1be4..b5a638d85cb4 100644 > --- a/drivers/md/md.h > +++ b/drivers/md/md.h > @@ -720,4 +720,58 @@ static inline void mddev_check_writesame(struct mddev *mddev, struct bio *bio) > #define RESYNC_BLOCK_SIZE (64*1024) > #define RESYNC_PAGES ((RESYNC_BLOCK_SIZE + PAGE_SIZE-1) / PAGE_SIZE) > > +/* for managing resync I/O pages */ > +struct resync_pages { > + unsigned idx; /* for get/put page from the pool */ > + void *raid_bio; > + struct page *pages[RESYNC_PAGES]; > +}; I'd like this to be embedded into r1bio directly. Not sure if we really need a structure. > + > +static inline int resync_alloc_pages(struct resync_pages *rp, > + gfp_t gfp_flags) > +{ > + int i; > + > + for (i = 0; i < RESYNC_PAGES; i++) { > + rp->pages[i] = alloc_page(gfp_flags); > + if (!rp->pages[i]) > + goto out_free; > + } > + > + return 0; > + > + out_free: > + while (--i >= 0) > + __free_page(rp->pages[i]); > + return -ENOMEM; > +} > + > +static inline void resync_free_pages(struct resync_pages *rp) > +{ > + int i; > + > + for (i = 0; i < RESYNC_PAGES; i++) > + __free_page(rp->pages[i]); Since we will use get_page, shouldn't this be put_page? > +} > + > +static inline void resync_get_all_pages(struct resync_pages *rp) > +{ > + int i; > + > + for (i = 0; i < RESYNC_PAGES; i++) > + get_page(rp->pages[i]); > +} > + > +static inline struct page *resync_fetch_page(struct resync_pages *rp) > +{ > + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(rp->idx >= RESYNC_PAGES)) > + return NULL; > + return rp->pages[rp->idx++]; I'd like the caller explicitly specify the index instead of a global variable to track it, which will make the code more understandable and less error prone. > +} > + > +static inline bool resync_page_available(struct resync_pages *rp) > +{ > + return rp->idx < RESYNC_PAGES; > +} Then we don't need this obscure API. Thanks, Shaohua