All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	dm-devel@redhat.com,
	"linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Any bio_clone_slow() implementation which doesn't share bi_io_vec?
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 19:09:32 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <cca20bcb-1674-f99d-d504-b7fc928e227a@gmx.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YZyiuFxAeKE/WMrR@infradead.org>



On 2021/11/23 16:13, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 04:10:35PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>> Without bio_chain() sounds pretty good, as we can still utilize
>> bi_end_io and bi_private.
>>
>> But this also means, we're now responsible not to release the source bio
>> since it has the real bi_io_vec.
>
> Just call bio_inc_remaining before submitting the cloned bio, and then
> call bio_endio on the root bio every time a clone completes.
>
Yeah, that sounds pretty good for regular usage.

But there is another very tricky case involved.

For btrfs, it supports zoned device, thus we have special calls sites to
switch between bio_add_page() and bio_add_zoned_append_page().

But zoned write can't not be split, nor there is an easy way to directly
convert a regular bio into a bio with zoned append pages.

Currently if we go the slow path, by allocating a new bio, then add
pages from original bio, and advance the original bio, we're able to do
the conversion from regular bio to zoned append bio.

Any idea on this corner case?

Thanks,
Qu

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	dm-devel@redhat.com,
	"linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] Any bio_clone_slow() implementation which doesn't share bi_io_vec?
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 19:09:32 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <cca20bcb-1674-f99d-d504-b7fc928e227a@gmx.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YZyiuFxAeKE/WMrR@infradead.org>



On 2021/11/23 16:13, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 04:10:35PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>> Without bio_chain() sounds pretty good, as we can still utilize
>> bi_end_io and bi_private.
>>
>> But this also means, we're now responsible not to release the source bio
>> since it has the real bi_io_vec.
>
> Just call bio_inc_remaining before submitting the cloned bio, and then
> call bio_endio on the root bio every time a clone completes.
>
Yeah, that sounds pretty good for regular usage.

But there is another very tricky case involved.

For btrfs, it supports zoned device, thus we have special calls sites to
switch between bio_add_page() and bio_add_zoned_append_page().

But zoned write can't not be split, nor there is an easy way to directly
convert a regular bio into a bio with zoned append pages.

Currently if we go the slow path, by allocating a new bio, then add
pages from original bio, and advance the original bio, we're able to do
the conversion from regular bio to zoned append bio.

Any idea on this corner case?

Thanks,
Qu


--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel


  reply	other threads:[~2021-11-23 11:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-11-23  6:44 Any bio_clone_slow() implementation which doesn't share bi_io_vec? Qu Wenruo
2021-11-23  6:44 ` [dm-devel] " Qu Wenruo
2021-11-23  7:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-11-23  7:43   ` [dm-devel] " Christoph Hellwig
2021-11-23  8:10   ` Qu Wenruo
2021-11-23  8:10     ` [dm-devel] " Qu Wenruo
2021-11-23  8:13     ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-11-23  8:13       ` [dm-devel] " Christoph Hellwig
2021-11-23 11:09       ` Qu Wenruo [this message]
2021-11-23 11:09         ` Qu Wenruo
2021-11-23 11:39         ` Johannes Thumshirn
2021-11-23 11:39           ` [dm-devel] " Johannes Thumshirn
2021-11-23 14:28           ` hch
2021-11-23 14:28             ` [dm-devel] " hch
2021-11-23 23:07             ` Qu Wenruo
2021-11-23 23:07               ` [dm-devel] " Qu Wenruo
2021-11-24  6:09               ` hch
2021-11-24  6:09                 ` [dm-devel] " hch
2021-11-24  6:18                 ` Qu Wenruo
2021-11-24  6:18                   ` [dm-devel] " Qu Wenruo
2021-11-24  7:02                   ` hch
2021-11-24  7:02                     ` [dm-devel] " hch
2021-11-24  7:22                     ` hch
2021-11-24  7:22                       ` [dm-devel] " hch
2021-11-24  7:25               ` Naohiro Aota
2021-11-24  7:25                 ` [dm-devel] " Naohiro Aota
2021-11-24  7:39                 ` Qu Wenruo
2021-11-24  7:39                   ` [dm-devel] " Qu Wenruo
2021-11-26 12:33       ` Qu Wenruo
2021-11-26 12:33         ` Qu Wenruo

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=cca20bcb-1674-f99d-d504-b7fc928e227a@gmx.com \
    --to=quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com \
    --cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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.