> In general, I think this feature is useful. I do echo Keith's response > that it should probably be named a bit differently, as PI is just one > use case of this. Accepted. In the next version, this suffix "pi" will be renamed to "meta" (meta_addr, meta_len, READV_META, WRITEV_META and etc...) > But for this patch in particular, not a huge fan of the rote copying of > rw.c into a new file. Now we have to patch two different spots whenever > a bug is found in there, that's not very maintainable. I do appreciate > the fact that this keeps the PI work out of the fast path for > read/write, but I do think this warrants a bit of refactoring work first > to ensure that there are helpers that can be shared between rw and > rw_pi. That definitely needs to be solved before this can be considered > for inclusion. I think it would be better to move some of the shared code to another file. For example "rw_common.[ch]". What do you think about? As an alternative I can leave such code in "rw.[ch]" file as is. -- Alexander V. Buev
