Message ID | 20190121081805.32727-1-ming.lei@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | block: support multi-page bvec | expand |
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 04:17:47PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > V14: > - drop patch(patch 4 in V13) for renaming bvec helpers, as suggested by Jens > - use mp_bvec_* as multi-page bvec helper name WTF? Where is this coming from? mp is just a nightmare of a name, and I also didn't see any comments like that. -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 09:22:46AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 04:17:47PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > > V14: > > - drop patch(patch 4 in V13) for renaming bvec helpers, as suggested by Jens > > - use mp_bvec_* as multi-page bvec helper name > > WTF? Where is this coming from? mp is just a nightmare of a name, > and I also didn't see any comments like that. You should see the recent discussion in which Jens doesn't agree on renaming bvec helper name, so the previous patch of 'block: rename bvec helpers' has to be dropped, and we have to find a new name for multi-page bvec helpers. Jens mentioned we can do the rename in next release after the whole patchset is merged first, then I think mp_bvec_* should be fine since its life time is short. Or do you other suggestion? Thanks, Ming -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 04:37:12PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 09:22:46AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 04:17:47PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > > > V14: > > > - drop patch(patch 4 in V13) for renaming bvec helpers, as suggested by Jens > > > - use mp_bvec_* as multi-page bvec helper name > > > > WTF? Where is this coming from? mp is just a nightmare of a name, > > and I also didn't see any comments like that. > > You should see the recent discussion in which Jens doesn't agree on > renaming bvec helper name, so the previous patch of 'block: rename bvec helpers' Where is that discussion? -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 09:38:10AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 04:37:12PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 09:22:46AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 04:17:47PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > > > > V14: > > > > - drop patch(patch 4 in V13) for renaming bvec helpers, as suggested by Jens > > > > - use mp_bvec_* as multi-page bvec helper name > > > > > > WTF? Where is this coming from? mp is just a nightmare of a name, > > > and I also didn't see any comments like that. > > > > You should see the recent discussion in which Jens doesn't agree on > > renaming bvec helper name, so the previous patch of 'block: rename bvec helpers' > > Where is that discussion? https://marc.info/?l=linux-next&m=154777954232109&w=2 Thanks, Ming -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
> V14: > - drop patch(patch 4 in V13) for renaming bvec helpers, as suggested by Jens > - use mp_bvec_* as multi-page bvec helper name > - fix one build issue, which is caused by missing one converion of > bio_for_each_segment_all in fs/gfs2 > - fix one 32bit ARCH specific issue caused by segment boundary mask > overflow Hey Ming, So is nvme-tcp also affected here? The only point where I see nvme-tcp can be affected is when initializing a bvec iter using bio_segments() as everywhere else we use iters which should transparently work.. I see that loop was converted, does it mean that nvme-tcp needs to call something like? -- bio_for_each_mp_bvec(bv, bio, iter) nr_bvecs++; -- -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 01:43:21AM -0800, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > > > V14: > > - drop patch(patch 4 in V13) for renaming bvec helpers, as suggested by Jens > > - use mp_bvec_* as multi-page bvec helper name > > - fix one build issue, which is caused by missing one converion of > > bio_for_each_segment_all in fs/gfs2 > > - fix one 32bit ARCH specific issue caused by segment boundary mask > > overflow > > Hey Ming, > > So is nvme-tcp also affected here? The only point where I see nvme-tcp > can be affected is when initializing a bvec iter using bio_segments() as > everywhere else we use iters which should transparently work.. > > I see that loop was converted, does it mean that nvme-tcp needs to > call something like? > -- > bio_for_each_mp_bvec(bv, bio, iter) > nr_bvecs++; bio_for_each_segment()/bio_segments() still works, just not as efficient as bio_for_each_mp_bvec() given each multi-page bvec(very similar with scatterlist) is returned in each loop. I don't look at nvme-tcp code yet. But if nvme-tcp supports this way, it can benefit from bio_for_each_mp_bvec(). Thanks, Ming -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel