xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: stop using ioends for direct write completions

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: stop using ioends for direct write completions
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 14:31:31 -0800
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20160128220255.GA28202@xxxxxx>
References: <1452766237-2314-1-git-send-email-hch@xxxxxx> <20160128131656.GB14876@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20160128205333.GF20038@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20160128211056.GA27287@xxxxxx> <20160128215853.GC6431@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20160128220255.GA28202@xxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 11:02:55PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 01:58:53PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > Aw, snap, I knew I'd forgotten something.  Yep, we'll need that... I think
> > xfs_end_io_direct_write will have to sniff out the error status from "size"
> > and either remap or discard the CoW allocations as appropriate.
> 
> I'd rather fix the direct I/O code to give us that information directly
> (pun intended).  I'll add that to my short term todo list as it seems
> useful for the existing code as well.

Ok.

As for the generic/154... the code on github is sadly not very bisectable,
other than to say that until yesterday I was still tacking new code onto
the end of the patchset.

That said, I was seeing occasional hangs in generic/154 (I needed to roll
the transactions between key parts of wrapping up a CoW) and they seem to
have gone away, so it's possible that I've fixed it already.

--D

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