On Mon, Oct 20 2008, Dmitri Monakhov wrote: > Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Sun, Oct 19 2008, Dmitri Monakhov wrote: > >> Block device write procedure is different from regular file: > >> - Actual write performed without i_mutex. > >> - It has no metadata, so generic_osync_inode(O_SYNCMETEDATA) can not livelock. > >> - We do not have to worry about S_ISUID/S_ISGID bits. > > > > I already did an O_DIRECT part of block device splicing [1], I'll fold > > this into the splice branch and double check with some testing. > > > > [1] http://git.kernel.dk/?p=linux-2.6-block.git;a=commitdiff;h=fbb724a0484aba938024d41ca1dd86337d2550c9;hp=08c7910b275a4c580ad646ae8654439c8dfae4c5 > Ok i've missed this branch :(, your approach is really cool. > But current patch seems not completely ready, Not surprising, it's still pretty fresh. The core of it works, which was the first objective :-) > O_DIRECT case: > - sync case missed, some one may want use it with O_DIRECT|O_SYNC Good point, I'll update that to wait on in-progress bios. > - i'm not sure why it is necessary to always hold bd_inode->i_mutex > inside __splice_on_pice(.., pipe_to_disk) It is not, I'll drop that too. > !O_DIRECT case: > - still use generic_file_splice_write Well, the patch adds O_DIRECT support, so that's not really a missing piece! > So I'll re-base to your patch and: > - add appropriate fixes necessary fixes for direct case. > - redone my patch on top of yours for buffered writes. > > What do you think? Please just send a patch for the missing bits on top of the current splice branch, that includes the patch I sent which is a rebased version of yours. -- Jens Axboe -- 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
