From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
willy@infradead.org, axboe@kernel.dk,
Phillip Lougher <phillip@squashfs.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: Rework bio_for_each_segment_all()
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 12:20:22 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZCW2xmJmVnFtRV2/@moria.home.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZCV3Q+TUMvTZZ/Tl@ovpn-8-19.pek2.redhat.com>
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 07:49:23PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> bio_for_each_segment_all is supposed to be used by bio which owns the
> bvec table, so it is just fine to return bvec pointer by bio_for_each_segment_all
> to save extra bvec copy.
No. And you wrote this code, so I'd expect you to know this:
bio_for_each_segment_all() can _not_ return a pointer into the original
bvec table, it has to synthesize bvecs - same as regular
bio_for_each_segment() - because it has to break bvecs up into
individiual pages.
There was zero benefit to the way you were doing it, you were just
adding pointer access to something that was on the caller's stack.
> And the change becomes not efficient any more.
Based on _what_?
Code size doesn't change, as I already showed hch. What's your claim?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-30 16:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-27 17:44 [PATCH 0/2] bio iter improvements Kent Overstreet
2023-03-27 17:44 ` [PATCH 1/2] block: Rework bio_for_each_segment_all() Kent Overstreet
2023-03-29 16:50 ` Phillip Lougher
2023-03-30 17:55 ` Kent Overstreet
2023-03-30 18:59 ` Phillip Lougher
2023-03-31 1:10 ` Phillip Lougher
2023-04-01 2:28 ` Kent Overstreet
2023-04-03 13:57 ` Phillip Lougher
2023-03-30 11:49 ` Ming Lei
2023-03-30 16:20 ` Kent Overstreet [this message]
2023-03-27 17:44 ` [PATCH 2/2] block: Rework bio_for_each_folio_all() Kent Overstreet
2023-04-03 15:13 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-04-03 15:51 ` Kent Overstreet
2023-03-27 22:14 ` [PATCH 0/2] bio iter improvements Christoph Hellwig
2023-03-28 20:28 ` Kent Overstreet
2023-04-03 15:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-04-03 16:36 ` Kent Overstreet
2023-04-04 15:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-04-04 15:47 ` Kent Overstreet
2023-04-04 15:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-04-04 16:08 ` Kent Overstreet
2023-04-04 16:01 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-04 16:06 ` Kent Overstreet
2023-04-04 16:14 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-04 17:11 ` Kent Overstreet
2023-03-28 13:42 ` Phillip Lougher
2023-03-28 16:57 ` Kent Overstreet
2023-03-29 16:41 ` Phillip Lougher
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=ZCW2xmJmVnFtRV2/@moria.home.lan \
--to=kent.overstreet@linux.dev \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=phillip@squashfs.org.uk \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox