xfs-masters
[Top] [All Lists]

[xfs-masters] Re: [PATCH -mm 3/10][RFC] aio: use iov_length instead of k

To: "Christoph Hellwig" <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Nate Diller" <nate@xxxxxxxxx>, "Nate Diller" <nate.diller@xxxxxxxxx>, "Andrew Morton" <akpm@xxxxxxxx>, "Alan Cox" <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Trond Myklebust" <trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Benjamin LaHaise" <bcrl@xxxxxxxxx>, "Alexander Viro" <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Suparna Bhattacharya" <suparna@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Kenneth W Chen" <kenneth.w.chen@xxxxxxxxx>, "David Brownell" <dbrownell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ocfs2-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-aio@xxxxxxxxx, xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [xfs-masters] Re: [PATCH -mm 3/10][RFC] aio: use iov_length instead of ki_left
From: "Nate Diller" <nate.diller@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 21:37:31 -0800
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=UJupqkFauPJkx8COykslQ0InjLNSViPwi1qbse3bnhXA6Z//Yqq9AEBFGYVE5HHJnMCzPr6SMWib0f8iP9u4i868C9xxui5uBJaF7ACChqBLz10LSMbds+b6bZq+yd2ZA6+PBm7Vewl3L4IOzKkuMD35Pomuv5eFA9JrvEMgvwY=
In-reply-to: <20070116021438.GA15774@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20070116015450.9764.37697.patchbomb.py@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070116015450.9764.52713.patchbomb.py@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070116021438.GA15774@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: xfs-masters-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On 1/15/07, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 05:54:50PM -0800, Nate Diller wrote:
> > Convert code using iocb->ki_left to use the more generic iov_length() call.
>
> No way.  We need to reduce the numer of iovec traversals, not adding
> more of them.

ok, I can work on a version of this that uses struct iodesc.  Maybe
something like this?

struct iodesc {
        struct iovec *iov;
        unsigned long nr_segs;
        size_t nbytes;
};

I suppose it's worth doing the iodesc thing along with this patchset
anyway, since it'll avoid an extra round of interface churn.

NATE


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>