All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com,
	hch@infradead.org, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] direct-io: Implement generic deferred AIO completions
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 10:11:40 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130813001140.GR12779@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130812161455.GA19471@quack.suse.cz>

On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 06:14:55PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
>   Hi Dave,
> 
>   I remembered about this patch set and realized I didn't get reply from
> you regarding the following question (see quoted email below for details):
> Do you really need to defer completion of appending direct IO? Because
> generic code makes sure appending direct IO isn't async and thus
> dio_complete() -> xfs_end_io_direct_write() gets called directly from
> do_blockdev_direct_IO(). I.e. from a normal context and not from interrupt.

Hi Jan, sorry I haven't got back to you sooner - I've had a lot
of stuff to deal with over the past couple of weeks.

The issue is that one part of the code expects deferral , and the
other part of the code isn't doing a deferral, and I never got
around to determining which was correct. I didn't connect the dots
between aio/appending and sync dispatch meaning that the way it is
operating now is fine - i.e. that the fact it doesn't call the
deferral completion path is OK and was intended to operate that
way by Christoph.

So leaving the code as it is without a deferal is fine.

> I've already addressed rest of your comments so this is the only item that
> is remaining.

Great :)

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com, hch@infradead.org,
	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>, Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] direct-io: Implement generic deferred AIO completions
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 10:11:40 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130813001140.GR12779@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130812161455.GA19471@quack.suse.cz>

On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 06:14:55PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
>   Hi Dave,
> 
>   I remembered about this patch set and realized I didn't get reply from
> you regarding the following question (see quoted email below for details):
> Do you really need to defer completion of appending direct IO? Because
> generic code makes sure appending direct IO isn't async and thus
> dio_complete() -> xfs_end_io_direct_write() gets called directly from
> do_blockdev_direct_IO(). I.e. from a normal context and not from interrupt.

Hi Jan, sorry I haven't got back to you sooner - I've had a lot
of stuff to deal with over the past couple of weeks.

The issue is that one part of the code expects deferral , and the
other part of the code isn't doing a deferral, and I never got
around to determining which was correct. I didn't connect the dots
between aio/appending and sync dispatch meaning that the way it is
operating now is fine - i.e. that the fact it doesn't call the
deferral completion path is OK and was intended to operate that
way by Christoph.

So leaving the code as it is without a deferal is fine.

> I've already addressed rest of your comments so this is the only item that
> is remaining.

Great :)

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2013-08-13  0:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-10 22:02 [PATCH 1/2] direct-io: Implement generic deferred AIO completions Jan Kara
2013-07-10 22:02 ` Jan Kara
2013-07-10 22:02 ` [PATCH 2/2] direct-io: Handle O_(D)SYNC AIO Jan Kara
2013-07-10 22:02   ` Jan Kara
2013-07-12  0:44 ` [PATCH 1/2] direct-io: Implement generic deferred AIO completions Dave Chinner
2013-07-16 21:00   ` Jan Kara
2013-07-16 21:00     ` Jan Kara
2013-08-12 16:14     ` Jan Kara
2013-08-12 16:14       ` Jan Kara
2013-08-13  0:11       ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2013-08-13  0:11         ` Dave Chinner
2013-08-01  8:17   ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-08-14  9:10 [PATCH 0/2 v2] Fix O_SYNC AIO DIO Jan Kara
2013-08-14  9:10 ` [PATCH 1/2] direct-io: Implement generic deferred AIO completions Jan Kara
2013-09-04 13:04 [PATCH 0/2 v3] Fix O_SYNC AIO DIO Jan Kara
2013-09-04 13:04 ` [PATCH 1/2] direct-io: Implement generic deferred AIO completions Jan Kara
2013-09-04 13:04   ` Jan Kara

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=20130813001140.GR12779@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.