From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
To: Ram <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] readahead: improve sequential read detection
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 20:14:27 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <42308073.CEA0DF75@tv-sign.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 1110412324.4816.89.camel@localhost
Ram wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 11:08, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > out:
> > - return newsize;
> > + return ra->prev_page + 1;
>
> This change introduces one key behavioural change in
> page_cache_readahead(). Instead of returning the number-of-pages
> successfully read, it now returns the next-page-index which is yet to be
> read. Was this essential?
The problem is that with this change:
+ if (offset == ra->prev_page && --req_size)
+ ++offset;
we can't just return newsize.
Because the caller of page_cache_readahead(offset, req_size) expects
that returned value is the number-of-pages successfully read from
this original offset.
Consider do_generic_mapping_read() reading two pages at offset 10,
with ra->prev_page == 10.
1st page, index == 10:
ret_size = page_cache_readahead(10, 2); // returns 1
next_index += ret_size; // next_index == 11
2nd page, index == 11:
if (index == next_index) // Yes
page_cache_readahead(11, 1); // BOGUS!
It can be solved without behavioural change of course, but it will be
more complex.
> At least, a comment towards this effect at the top of the function is
> worth adding.
Yes, it's my fault. I should have added comment in changelog at least.
Oleg.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-03-10 16:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-03-02 19:08 [PATCH 2/2] readahead: improve sequential read detection Oleg Nesterov
2005-03-03 2:01 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-09 23:52 ` Ram
2005-03-10 0:03 ` Steven Pratt
2005-03-10 0:06 ` Ram
2005-03-10 17:14 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
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=42308073.CEA0DF75@tv-sign.ru \
--to=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
--cc=slpratt@austin.ibm.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