public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Zach Brown <zach.brown@oracle.com>
Cc: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] remove redundant iov segment check
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 11:01:36 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070102110136.GA20640@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <28F99581-3A2A-45BD-8F00-B554313E2C26@oracle.com>

> I wonder if it wouldn't be better to make this change as part of a  
> larger change that moves towards an explicit iovec container struct  
> rather than bare 'struct iov *' and 'nr_segs' arguments.  The struct  
> could have a flag that expressed whether the elements had been  
> checked.  A helper could be called by the upper and lower code paths  
> which does the checking, marks the flag, and avoids checking again if  
> the flag is set.
> 
> We've wanted an explicit struct in the past to avoid the multiple  
> walks of iovecs that various paths do for their own reasons.  The  
> iovec walk that is checking for length wrapping could also be  
> building a bitmap of length alignment that O_DIRECT could be using to  
> test 512B alignment without having to walk the iovec again.

I suspect it should be rather trivial to get this started.  As a first
step we simply add a

struct iodesc {
	int nr_segs;
	struct iovec ioc[]
};

And then we can add fields where nessecary.  First a full_length one
to avoid the loops to calculate thw whole I/O size, then flags for
the alignment check, etc..  

  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-01-02 11:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-12-04 16:26 [patch] remove redundant iov segment check Chen, Kenneth W
2006-12-04 19:18 ` Zach Brown
2006-12-04 19:45   ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-12-04 19:50     ` Zach Brown
2007-01-02 11:01   ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2007-01-02 18:22     ` Zach Brown
2007-01-02 18:25       ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-12-04 19:36 ` Andrew Morton
2006-12-04 19:50   ` Chen, Kenneth W

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=20070102110136.GA20640@infradead.org \
    --to=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=zach.brown@oracle.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