xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH v6 0/8] block: prepare for multipage bvecs

To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/8] block: prepare for multipage bvecs
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 11:53:49 -0400
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-block@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "open list:DRBD DRIVER" <drbd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>, Joe Thornber <ejt@xxxxxxxxxx>, Keith Busch <keith.busch@xxxxxxxxx>, Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@xxxxxxxxx>, "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@xxxxxxxxxx>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx>, NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxxx>, Sagi Grimberg <sagig@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Shaohua Li <shli@xxxxxx>, Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@xxxxxxxxxx>, Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>, "open list:XFS FILESYSTEM" <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1464615294-9946-1-git-send-email-ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1464615294-9946-1-git-send-email-ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Mon, May 30 2016 at  9:34am -0400,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> Interests[1] have been shown in multipage bvecs, so this patchset
> try to prepare for the support and do two things:
> 
> 1) the 1st 4 patches use bvec iterator to implement iterate_bvec(),
> then we can drop the non-standard way for iterating bvec, which
> can be thought as a good cleanup for lib/iov_iter.c
> 
> 2) remove BIO_MAX_SECTORS and makre BIO_MAX_SIZE as obsolete, and
> now there is only one user for each. Once multipage bvecs is introduced,
> one bio may hold lots of sectors, and we should always use sort of
> BIO_MAX_VECS which should be introduced in future and is similiar
> with current BIO_MAX_PAGES.
> 
> The only functional change is iterate_bvec():lib/iov_iter.c
> 
> xfstests(-a auto) over loop aio is run for ext4/xfs to verify 
> the change and no regression found with this patchset.
> 
> V6:
>       - rebased on v4.7-rc1
>       - add reviewed-by tag
>       - mark BIO_MAX_SIZE as obsolete instead of removing because
>       dm-tree adds one usage now

Not sure what you're referring to here with "dm-tree" (since "dm-tree"
doesn't exist).  But only direct user of "BIO_MAX_SIZE" in DM appears to
be dm-crypt.c.  Maybe you've identified some indirect use of
BIO_MAX_SIZE?

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