[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D3DD184.4040700@fusionio.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 20:22:44 +0100
From: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com>
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"hch@...radead.org" <hch@...radead.org>,
Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] fs: make aio plug
On 2011-01-24 20:15, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com> writes:
>
>>>> @@ -1698,6 +1701,7 @@ long do_io_submit(aio_context_t ctx_id, long nr,
>>>> if (ret)
>>>> break;
>>>> }
>>>> + blk_finish_plug(&plug);
>>>> aio_batch_free(batch_hash);
>>>
>>> I'm pretty sure you want blk_finish_plug to run after aio_batch_free.
>>
>> You mean to cover the iput()? That's not a bad idea, if that ends up
>> writing it out. I did a few read tests here and confirmed it's sending
>> down batches of whatever number is submitted.
>
> No, I actually didn't make it all the way through 5/10, so I didn't
> realize you got rid of the blk_run_address_space. I agree with the TODO
> item to get rid of the aio batching, since it's now taken care of with
> the on-stack plugging.
Oh, so that was the whole point of the series :-)
> As for the iput, I don't think you will get the final iput here, since
> you've just scheduled I/O against the file.
Good point, so the original comment is moot - it wont make a difference.
Still, may not be a bad idea to do the freeing first. I was sort-of
hoping to be able to kill the batching in fs/aio.c completely, though...
--
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