lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Aug]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v6 11/13] block: Rework bio_pair_split()
From
Date
>>>>> "Tejun" == Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> writes:

Tejun> I complained about this in the last posting and in the previous
Tejun> patch. Please respond. Martin, are you okay with these
Tejun> integrity changes?

I missed the first several iterations of all this while I was out on
vacation. I'll have to try to wrap my head around the new approach.

However, I'm not sure I like the overall approach of the new splitting.
Instead of all this cloning, slicing and dicing of bio_vecs I'd rather
we bit the bullet and had an offset + length for the vector inside each
bio. That way we could keep the bio_vec immutable and make clones more
lightweight since their vecs would always point to the parent. This also
makes it trivial to split I/Os in the stacking drivers and removes evils
in the partial completion code path. It would also allow to sever the
ties between "size of block range operated on" vs. bi_size which we need
for copy offload, discard, etc.

--
Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-08-24 05:01    [W:0.094 / U:0.664 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site