[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100625103550.GA3586@quack.suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 12:35:50 +0200
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
xfs@....sgi.com, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] direct-io: move aio_complete into ->end_io
On Fri 25-06-10 02:36:10, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 11:59:22PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Moreover the async testing you do does not seem to be completely right.
> > dio->is_async is a flag that controls whether dio code waits for IO to be
> > completed or not. In particular it is not set for AIO that spans beyond
> > current i_size so it does not seem to be exactly what you need (at least
> > for ext4 it isn't). I think that is_sync_kiocb() is a test that should be
> > used to recognize AIO - and that has an advantage that you don't have to
> > pass the is_async flag around.
>
> No. is_sync_kiocb() means the ioctb was not intended as sync I/O from
> the start. But we can only call aio_complete when we returned
> -EIOCBQUEUED from ->aio_read/write. Take a look at the comment near the
> end of direct_io_worker().
Ah, I see. Thanks for explanation. It's ugly but I also don't see a
nicer way how to handle this.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists