[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070105072305.GN11203@kernel.dk>
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 08:23:05 +0100
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...l.org,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
Mark Fasheh <mark.fasheh@...cle.com>,
"Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 4/4 block: explicit plugging
On Thu, Jan 04 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Jens Axboe wrote:
> >Nick writes:
> >
> >This is a patch to perform block device plugging explicitly in the
> >submitting
> >process context rather than implicitly by the block device.
>
> Hi Jens,
>
> Hey thanks for doing so much hard work with this, I couldn't have fixed
> all the block layer stuff myself. QRCU looks like a good solution for the
> barrier/sync operations (/me worried that one wouldn't exist), and a
> novel use of RCU!
>
> The only thing I had been thinking about before it is ready for primetime
> -- as far as the VM side of things goes -- is whether we should change
> the hard calls to address_space operations, such that they might be
> avoided or customised when there is no backing block device?
>
> I'm sure the answer to this is "yes", so I have an idea for a simple
> implementation... but I'd like to hear thoughts from network fs / raid
> people?
I suppose that would be the proper thing to do, for non __make_request()
operated backing devices. I'll add the hooks, then we can cook up a raid
implementation if need be.
--
Jens Axboe
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists