From: Johannes Thumshirn <Johannes.Thumshirn@wdc.com>
To: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>,
Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>,
David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Cc: "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] btrfs: optimize simple reads in btrfsic_map_block
Date: Wed, 31 May 2023 12:31:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c5f70d87-6eed-5367-eec9-cc20c65f51e5@wdc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6997cf68-8775-f518-9b7d-2dbc15b5ce58@gmx.com>
On 31.05.23 10:49, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
>
> On 2023/5/31 12:17, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Pass a smap into __btrfs_map_block so that the usual case of a read that
>> doesn't require parity raid recovery doesn't need an extra memory
>> allocation for the btrfs_io_context.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
>
> Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
>
> I'm more curious on whether the check-integrity feature is still under
> heavy usage.
>
> It's from old time where we don't have a lot of sanity checks, but
> nowadays it looks less worthy and can cause extra burden to maintain.
I was going to ask the same question. I wouldn't mind removing it
at all.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-31 12:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-31 4:17 cleanup the btrfs_map_block interface Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-31 4:17 ` [PATCH 1/6] btrfs: remove BTRFS_MAP_DISCARD Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-31 8:45 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-05-31 4:17 ` [PATCH 2/6] btrfs: optimize simple reads in btrfsic_map_block Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-31 8:47 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-05-31 12:31 ` Johannes Thumshirn [this message]
2023-05-31 12:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-31 12:46 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2023-05-31 4:17 ` [PATCH 3/6] btrfs: remove btrfs_map_block Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-31 8:48 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-05-31 4:17 ` [PATCH 4/6] btrfs: rename __btrfs_map_block to btrfs_map_block Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-31 8:48 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-05-31 4:17 ` [PATCH 5/6] btrfs: remove btrfs_map_sblock Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-31 8:49 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-05-31 4:17 ` [PATCH 6/6] btrfs: remove need_full_stripe Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-31 8:52 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-05-31 12:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-31 12:35 ` cleanup the btrfs_map_block interface Johannes Thumshirn
2023-05-31 23:38 ` David Sterba
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=c5f70d87-6eed-5367-eec9-cc20c65f51e5@wdc.com \
--to=johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com \
--cc=clm@fb.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox