All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tao Ma <tm@tao.ma>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/direct-io.c: Calcuate fs_count correctly in get_more_blocks.
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 10:13:27 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E77F6C7.4090509@tao.ma> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110919153149.be4ab3ca.akpm@google.com>

On 09/20/2011 06:31 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 16:25:39 +0800
> Tao Ma <tm@tao.ma> wrote:
> 
>> In get_more_blocks, we use dio_count to calcuate fs_count and do some
>> tricky things to increase fs_count if dio_count isn't aligned. But
>> actually it still has some cornor case that can't be coverd. See the
>> following example:
>> ./dio_write foo -s 1024 -w 4096(direct write 4096 bytes at offset 1024).
>> The same goes if the offset isn't aligned to fs_blocksize.
>>
>> In this case, the old calculation counts fs_count to be 1, but actually
>> we will write into 2 different blocks(if fs_blocksize=4096). The old code
>> just works, since it will call get_block twice(and may have to allocate
>> and create extent twice for file systems like ext4). So we'd better call
>> get_block just once with the proper fs_count.
> 
> Has this been carefully tested with more than just ext4?  If so, which?
ext4 only by xfstests, fs_mark, postmark, ffsb, dbench and sysbench. But
I can try xfs later. I will update you with the test result.

Thanks
Tao

  reply	other threads:[~2011-09-20  2:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-09-19  8:25 [PATCH] fs/direct-io.c: Calcuate fs_count correctly in get_more_blocks Tao Ma
2011-09-19 22:31 ` Andrew Morton
2011-09-20  2:13   ` Tao Ma [this message]
2011-09-23  4:49   ` Tao Ma

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=4E77F6C7.4090509@tao.ma \
    --to=tm@tao.ma \
    --cc=akpm@google.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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.