[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170814084837.GF26913@bbox>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 17:48:37 +0900
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
"karam . lee" <karam.lee@....com>, seungho1.park@....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" <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
kernel-team <kernel-team@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/6] fs: use on-stack-bio if backing device has
BDI_CAP_SYNC capability
Hi Christoph,
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:46:15PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 08:06:24PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > I like it, but do you think we should switch to sbvec[<constant>] to
> > preclude pathological cases where nr_pages is large?
>
> Yes, please.
Still, I don't understand how sbvec[nr_pages] with on-stack bio in
do_mpage_readpage can help the performance.
IIUC, do_mpage_readpage works with page-base. IOW, it passes just one
page, not multiple pages so if we use on-stack bio, we just add *a page*
via bio_add_page and submit the bio before the function returning.
So, rather than sbvec[1], why de we need sbvec[nr_pages]?
Please, let me open my eyes. :)
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists