On Tuesday 08 July 2008 01:08, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Tue, 8 Jul 2008, Nick Piggin wrote: > > > Well, other than my original proposal, which would just have reused > > > the do_generic_file_read() infrastructure for splice. I still don't > > > see why we shouldn't use that, until the whole async splice-in thing > > > is properly figured out. > > > > Given the alternatives, perhaps this is for the best, at least for > > now. > > Yeah. I'm not at all opposed to improving splice to be able to do all > sorts of fancy things like async splice-in, and stealing of pages. > But it's unlikely that I will have the motivation to implement any of > them just to fix this bug. Yeah. Well then, would you mind having another cut at the patch to do that? I guess it might help if you don't remove the ->confirm code -- after fixing the bug then we could discuss what to do with that code and how we could implement async. I guess it would be nice to find something that gets a lot of benefit with the async splicing. Luckily the existing scheme is workable enough that it would be easy to test a hunch just by patching it back in... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
