From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Mon, 28 May 2018 10:30:43 +0800 From: Ming Lei To: Jens Axboe Cc: Kent Overstreet , Christoph Hellwig , Alexander Viro , David Sterba , Huang Ying , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Theodore Ts'o , "Darrick J . Wong" , Coly Li , Filipe Manana Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH V5 00/33] block: support multipage bvec Message-ID: <20180528023042.GC26790@ming.t460p> References: <20180525034621.31147-1-ming.lei@redhat.com> <20180525045306.GB8740@kmo-pixel> <8aa4276d-c0bc-3266-aa53-bf08a2e5ab5c@kernel.dk> <20180527072332.GA18240@ming.t460p> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 07:44:52PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 5/27/18 1:23 AM, Ming Lei wrote: > > On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:30:46AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > >> On 5/24/18 10:53 PM, Kent Overstreet wrote: > >>> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 11:45:48AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> This patchset brings multipage bvec into block layer: > >>> > >>> patch series looks sane to me. goddamn that's a lot of renaming. > >> > >> Indeed... I actually objected to some of the segment -> page > >> renaming, but it's still in there. The foo2() temporary functions > >> also concern me, we all know there's nothing more permanent than a > >> temporary fixup. > > > > Jens, I remember I explained the renaming story to you in lsfmm a bit: > > > > 1) the current naming of segment is actually wrong, since every segment > > only stores one single-page vector > > > > 2) the most important part is that once multipage bvec is introduced, > > if the old _segment naming is still kept, it can be very confusing, > > especially no good name is left for the helpers of dealing with real > > segment. > > Yes, we discussed exactly this, which is why I'm surprised you went > ahead with the same approach. I told you I don't like tree wide renames, Maybe I misunderstood your point, that isn't strange given my poor english, :-) > if they can be avoided. I'd rather suffer some pain wrt page vs segments > naming, and then later do a rename (if it bothers us) once the dust has > settled on the interesting part of the changes. > > I'm very well away of our current naming and what it signifies. With > #1, you are really splitting hairs, imho. Find a decent name for > multiple segment. Chunk? OK, will try _chunk in next post. > > > For the foo2() temporary change, that is only for avoiding tree-wide > > change in one single tree, with this way, we can change sub-system one > > by one, but if you think it is good to do tree-wide conversion in one > > patch, I am fine to do it in next version. > > It's still a painful middle step. I hate the conversion too, but looks it can't be avoided since bio_for_each_segment_all() has to be changed. Could you share us what your favorite approach is for this conversion? Thanks, Ming