[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45e7775a7ea76d4da603e99f9ab7d3cbbe5a6871.camel@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2023 11:30:04 -0500
From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Marc Dionne
<marc.dionne@...istor.com>, Paulo Alcantara <pc@...guebit.com>, Shyam
Prasad N <sprasad@...rosoft.com>, Tom Talpey <tom@...pey.com>, Dominique
Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>, Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@...nel.org>,
Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>, Christian Brauner
<christian@...uner.io>, linux-cachefs@...hat.com,
linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org, linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org,
v9fs@...ts.linux.dev, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/39] netfs: Implement unbuffered/DIO vs buffered
I/O locking
On Wed, 2023-12-13 at 11:08 -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-12-13 at 15:23 +0000, David Howells wrote:
> > Borrow NFS's direct-vs-buffered I/O locking into netfslib. Similar code is
> > also used in ceph.
> >
> > Modify it to have the correct checker annotations for i_rwsem lock
> > acquisition/release and to return -ERESTARTSYS if waits are interrupted.
> >
>
> This is just adding new infrastructure. It'd be nice to go ahead and
> convert a filesystem to use this at the same time. Ceph would be a good
> candidate. Otherwise, I'm not sure how this shakes out as far as
> cleanliness in the callers.
>
Nevermind...I misunderstood what you were trying to do here. You're not
subsuming this into common code that filesystems will use directly, this
is just using the same scheme when doing I/O using netfs helpers.
Ceph and other filesystems will get converted to this when they are
converted to do all of their I/O via netfs.
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists