From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BA8329DF5 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 15:48:54 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B473AC005 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 13:48:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.129]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id SympHHJR636AqXdW for ; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 13:48:51 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 08:48:50 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] xfs: Introduce writeback context for writepages Message-ID: <20160209214850.GE14668@dastard> References: <1454910258-7578-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1454910258-7578-3-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20160209133941.GA13357@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160209133941.GA13357@infradead.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: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 05:39:41AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Removing xfs_cancel_ioend and replacing it with the start and cancel > writeback scheme that we currently only use for > xfs_setfilesize_trans_alloc failures actually seems to be the biggest > change in this patch and is entirely undocumented. Any chance you > could split this into a prep patch and properly document it? I can try. > > - > > - if (!ioend || need_ioend || type != ioend->io_type) { > > - xfs_ioend_t *previous = *result; > > - > > - ioend = xfs_alloc_ioend(inode, type); > > - ioend->io_offset = offset; > > - ioend->io_buffer_head = bh; > > - ioend->io_buffer_tail = bh; > > - if (previous) > > - previous->io_list = ioend; > > - *result = ioend; > > + if (!wpc->ioend || wpc->io_type != wpc->ioend->io_type || > > + bh->b_blocknr != wpc->last_block + 1) { > > We now start a new ioend if the blocks aren't contiguous, which seems > reasonable. But this also means the similar check in xfs_submit_ioend > should be removed at the same time. OK. -Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs