[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120809013923.GH7262@moria.home.lan>
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 18:39:23 -0700
From: Kent Overstreet <koverstreet@...gle.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dm-devel@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk, agk@...hat.com,
neilb@...e.de, drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com, vgoyal@...hat.com,
mpatocka@...hat.com, sage@...dream.net, yehuda@...newdream.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 08/12] block: Introduce new bio_split()
On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 04:05:32PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> One more thing.
>
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 03:08:37PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > + if (bio_integrity(bio)) {
> > + bio_integrity_clone(ret, bio, gfp, bs);
> > + bio_integrity_trim(ret, 0, bio_sectors(ret));
> > + bio_integrity_trim(bio, bio_sectors(ret), bio_sectors(bio));
>
> Is this equivalent to bio_integrity_split() performance-wise?
Strictly speaking, no. But it has the advantage of being drastically
simpler - and the only one only worked for single page bios so I
would've had to come up with something new from scratch, and as
confusing as the integrity stuff is I wouldn't trust the result.
I'm skeptical that it's going to matter in practice given how much
iteration is done elsewhere in the course of processing a bio and given
that this stuff isn't used with high end SSDs...
--
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