Re: [PATCH v4 5/7] fs: prioritize and separate direct_io from dax_io

[Boaz Harrosh <boaz@plexistor.com>]

On 05/02/2016 09:48 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
<>
>> And then it keeps broken the aligned buffered writes, which are still
>> broken after this set.
> 
> ...identical to the current situation with a traditional disk.
> 

Not true!! please see what I wrote "aligned buffered writes"
If there are no reads involved then there are no errors returned
to application.

>> I have by now read the v2 patches. And I think you guys did not yet try
>> the proper fix for dax_do_io. I think you need to go deeper into the loops
>> and selectively call bdev_* when error on a specific page copy. No need to
>> go through direct_IO path at all.
> 
> We still reach a point where the minimum granularity of
> bdev_direct_access() is larger than a sector, so you end up still
> needing to have the application understand how to send a properly
> aligned I/O.  The semantics of how to send a properly aligned
> direct-I/O are already well understood, so we simply reuse that path.
> 

You are making a mountain out of a mouse. The simple copy of a file
from start (offset ZERO) to end-of-file which is the most common usage
on earth is perfectly aligned and needs not any O_DIRECT and is what is used
everywhere.

>> Do you need that I send you a patch to demonstrate what I mean?
> 
> I remain skeptical of what you are proposing, but yes, a patch has a
> better chance to move the discussion forward.
> 

Sigh! OK
Boaz

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>