From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com>
Cc: agk@redhat.com, mchristi@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com,
j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/8] rqbased-dm: add block layer hook
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 08:49:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061221074947.GC17199@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061220.165246.85417944.k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com>
On Wed, Dec 20 2006, Kiyoshi Ueda wrote:
> Hi Jens,
>
> Sorry for the less explanation.
>
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 14:49:24 +0100, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 19 2006, Kiyoshi Ueda wrote:
> > > This patch adds new "end_io_first" hook in __end_that_request_first()
> > > for request-based device-mapper.
> >
> > What's this for, lack of stacking?
>
> I don't understand the meaning of "lack of stacking" well but
> I guess that it means "Is the existing hook in end_that_request_last()
> not enough?" If so, the answer is no.
> (If the geuss is wrong, please let me know.)
>
> The new hook is needed for error handling in dm.
> For example, when an error occurred on a request, dm-multipath
> wants to try another path before returning EIO to application.
> Without the new hook, at the point of end_that_request_last(),
> the bios are already finished with error and can't be retried.
Ok, I see what you are getting at. The current ->end_io() is called when
the request has fully completed, you want notification for each chunk
potentially completed.
I think a better design here would be to use ->end_io() as the full
completion handler, similar to how bio->bi_end_io() works. A request
originating from __make_request() would set something ala:
int fs_end_io(struct request *rq, int error, unsigned int nr_bytes)
{
if (!__end_that_request_first(rq, err, nr_bytes)) {
end_that_request_last(rq, error);
return 0;
}
return 1;
}
and normal io completion from a driver would use a helper:
int blk_complete_io(struct request *rq, int error, unsigned int nr_bytes)
{
return rq->end_io(rq, error, nr_bytes);
}
instead of calling the functions manually. That would allow you to get
notification right at the beginning and do what you need, without adding
a special hook for this.
When designing these things, never be afraid to change some of the core
bits. It is a lot better than hacking around the current code, if it
doesn't quite fit your needs.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-12-21 7:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-12-19 22:11 [RFC PATCH 2/8] rqbased-dm: add block layer hook Kiyoshi Ueda
2006-12-20 13:49 ` Jens Axboe
2006-12-20 21:52 ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2006-12-21 7:49 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2006-12-21 22:22 ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2006-12-21 22:56 ` business1
2006-12-22 7:18 ` [dm-devel] " Mike Christie
2006-12-22 19:55 ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2006-12-21 23:00 ` business1
2006-12-21 22:56 ` business1
2006-12-21 22:53 ` business1
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=20061221074947.GC17199@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=agk@redhat.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com \
--cc=k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mchristi@redhat.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