[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170731074404.GA16749@lst.de>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:44:04 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "karam . lee" <karam.lee@....com>,
Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@...hat.com>,
Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>, seungho1.park@....com,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] remove rw_page() from brd, pmem and btt
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 09:42:06AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 04:36:47PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > Do you suggest define something special flag(e.g., SWP_INMEMORY)
> > for in-memory swap to swap_info_struct when swapon time manually
> > or from bdi_queue_someting automatically?
> > And depending the flag of swap_info_struct, use the onstack bio
> > instead of dynamic allocation if the swap device is in-memory?
>
> Currently swap always just does I/O on a single page as far
> as I can tell, so it can always just use an on-stack bio and
> biovec.
That's for synchronous I/O, aka reads of course. For writes you'll
need to do a dynamic allocation if they are asynchronous. But yes,
if we want to force certain devices to be synchronous we'll need
a flag for that.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists