[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <571539A6.5070401@hpe.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 15:46:46 -0400
From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@....com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
CC: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
<linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@....com>,
Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@....com>,
Toshimitsu Kani <toshi.kani@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] ext4: Pass in DIO_SKIP_DIO_COUNT flag if inode_dio_begin()
called
On 04/15/2016 06:19 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 04/15/2016 04:17 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:21:13PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>>>> What the patch does is to eliminate the innermost
>>>> inode_dio_begin/end pair.
>>> Yes, and with that change inode_dio_wait() no longer waits for
>>> AIO+DIO writes on ext4, hence breaking truncate IO barrier
>>> requirements of inode_dio_wait().
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Dave.
>> You are right and thank for pointing this out to me. I think I focus too
>> much on the dax_do_io() internal and didn't realize that inode_dio_end() can
>> be deferred in __blockdev_direct_IO(). I will update my patch to eliminate
>> the extra inode_dio_begin/end pair only for dax_do_io().
> Even there there is the risk that a future change will break ext4.
> the ext4 code needs fixing first, then you can look at skipping the
> DIO based counting everywhere.
>
> i.e. fix the root cause of the problem, don't hack around it or
> throw band-aids over it.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
I agree that the ext4 code needs fixing w.r.t. the problem that you
found. That will take more time and testing. In the mean time, I think
it is OK to pick the low-hanging fruits that are handled by my patch.
Cheers,
Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists