From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752181AbbC2JNY (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Mar 2015 05:13:24 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-f49.google.com ([74.125.82.49]:36106 "EHLO mail-wg0-f49.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750882AbbC2JNU (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Mar 2015 05:13:20 -0400 Message-ID: <5517C22D.8040003@plexistor.com> Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 12:13:17 +0300 From: Boaz Harrosh User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Boaz Harrosh , Dave Chinner , Matthew Wilcox CC: Matthew Wilcox , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, msharbiani@twopensource.com Subject: Re: Should implementations of ->direct_access be allowed to sleep? References: <1411677218-29146-1-git-send-email-matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com> <1411677218-29146-22-git-send-email-matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com> <20150324185046.GA4994@whiteoak.sf.office.twttr.net> <20150326170918.GO4003@linux.intel.com> <20150326193224.GA28129@dastard> <5517B18A.3050305@plexistor.com> In-Reply-To: <5517B18A.3050305@plexistor.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/29/2015 11:02 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > On 03/26/2015 09:32 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: <> > I think that ->direct_access should not be any different then > any other block-device access, ie allow to sleep. > BTW: Matthew you yourself have said that after a page-load of memcpy a user should call sched otherwise bad things will happen to the system you even commented so on one of my patches when you thought I was allowing a single memcpy bigger than a page. So if the user *must* call sched after a call to ->direct_access that is a "sleep" No? Thanks Boaz