[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111006134021.GA20190@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 09:40:21 -0400
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] block: add bio_map_sg
On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 12:51:39AM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> I have some questions.
>
> - Could we later use this bio_map_sg() to implement blk_rq_map_sg() and
> remove some duplicated code?
I didn't even think about that, but it actually looks very possible
to factor the "meat" in the for each bvec loop into a common helper
used by both.
> - Don't you need to support a chained bio (bio->next != NULL)? Because
> I did not see any looping in the last patch
> [PATCH 5/5] virtio-blk: implement ->make_request
> Or is it that ->make_request() is a single bio at a time?
> If so could we benefit from both bio-chaining and sg-chaning to
> make bigger IOs?
At this point ->make_request is a single bio interface. I have some
WIP patches to do the onstack plugging per bio, at which point it would
change to take a list. For this to work we'd need major changes to
all ->make_request drivers.
--
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