On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 10:10:56PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 12:53:33PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 05:16:56AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Any chance to get a review for this? It should really help > > > with sorting out the buffered I/O COW code. > > > > It looks reasonable to me. I separated the dio and buffered CoW remap paths a > > couple of weeks ago, because it seems that IO errors only get passed back as a > > return value from __blockdev_direct_IO, therefore the remapping has to be done > > from xfs_vm_do_dio anyway because we don't want to remap if the write fails. > > Just yesterday I removed the "is_cow" flag from the ioend, so now we're back to > > having a separate XFS_IO_COW ioend type. > > For direct I/O we will need something like this to properly support AIO > writes. Aw, snap, I knew I'd forgotten something. Yep, we'll need that... I think xfs_end_io_direct_write will have to sniff out the error status from "size" and either remap or discard the CoW allocations as appropriate. Heh, guess I'd better go write some aio tests. :) > > So... reflink doesn't need the patch but OTOH directio doesn't really need > > the overhead of allocating an ioend anyway. :) > > Yep. --D _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
