Re: [PATCH] xfs: don't allocate an ioend for direct I/O completions

[Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>]

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 09:42:23AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 11:54:21PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Back in the days when the direct I/O ->end_io callback could be called
> > from interrupt context for AIO we needed a structure to hand off to the
> > workqueue, and reused the ioend structure for this purpose.  These days
> > ->end_io is always called from user or workqueue context, which allows us
> > to avoid this memory allocation and simplify the code significantly.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> > ---
> 
> Looks mostly Ok to me. In fact, with xfs_finish_ioend_sync() calling
> xfs_end_io() directly, I don't see how we currently get into the wq at
> all. Anyways, a few notes...

I've pulled this in after making the couple of minor changes that
Brian suggested....

> > @@ -1507,39 +1514,17 @@ xfs_vm_direct_IO(
> >  {
> >  	struct inode		*inode = iocb->ki_filp->f_mapping->host;
> >  	struct block_device	*bdev = xfs_find_bdev_for_inode(inode);
> > -	struct xfs_ioend	*ioend = NULL;
> > -	ssize_t			ret;
> >  
> >  	if (rw & WRITE) {
> 
> A nit, but I guess you could kill the braces here now too.

Given it's a multi-line return statement, the braces are fine. FWIW,
when we have a if () { return ...} else { return ... } we normally
kill the else. i.e:

	if (rw & WRITE) {
		return foo(
			bar,
			baz);
	}
	return .....;

So I modified it like this.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs