From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>
Cc: Christian Ehrhardt <ehrhardt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@redhat.com>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] direct-io: btrfs: avoid splitting dio requests for non-btrfs filesystems
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 14:58:33 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101102185833.GA7404@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101102145717.GA2531@localhost.localdomain>
On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 10:57:18AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> (which I did anyway because of my bug). So maybe the right idea is to rip out
> my logical offset tests altogether and fix dio so we treat buffer_boundary()
> like gospel. That way Btrfs can get what it needs without having this weird
> special code, and then we can look at how other fs's set buffer_boundary (I'm
> pretty sure ext2/3 are the only ones) and make sure they are setting it when
> they really mean to.
That sounds pretty reasonable to me. I really don't like the flag in
the kiocb in this patch, and handling it as part of the get_blocks
callback sounds much better to me. I don't know enough about the
bounary blocks to know if we can reuse them - if we can it's perfect,
if not another buffer flag seems like the way to go.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-02 18:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-02 12:18 [RFC][PATCH] direct-io: btrfs: avoid splitting dio requests for non-btrfs filesystems Christian Ehrhardt
2010-11-02 14:57 ` Josef Bacik
2010-11-02 18:58 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
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=20101102185833.GA7404@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=ehrhardt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=jbacik@redhat.com \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=josef@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).