From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DA217CA2 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 15:11:03 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED485304039 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 13:10:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from newverein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id AkuQkjx25zQg75nA (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 13:10:57 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 22:10:56 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: stop using ioends for direct write completions Message-ID: <20160128211056.GA27287@lst.de> References: <1452766237-2314-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <20160128131656.GB14876@infradead.org> <20160128205333.GF20038@birch.djwong.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160128205333.GF20038@birch.djwong.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 12:53:33PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 05:16:56AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Any chance to get a review for this? It should really help > > with sorting out the buffered I/O COW code. > > It looks reasonable to me. I separated the dio and buffered CoW remap paths a > couple of weeks ago, because it seems that IO errors only get passed back as a > return value from __blockdev_direct_IO, therefore the remapping has to be done > from xfs_vm_do_dio anyway because we don't want to remap if the write fails. > Just yesterday I removed the "is_cow" flag from the ioend, so now we're back to > having a separate XFS_IO_COW ioend type. For direct I/O we will need something like this to properly support AIO writes. > So... reflink doesn't need the patch but OTOH directio doesn't really need > the overhead of allocating an ioend anyway. :) Yep. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs