Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:36:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:36:42 -0500 Received: from chiara.elte.hu ([157.181.150.200]:46858 "HELO chiara.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:36:37 -0500 Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 21:35:58 +0100 (CET) From: Ingo Molnar Reply-To: To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ben LaHaise , "Stephen C. Tweedie" , Alan Cox , Manfred Spraul , Steve Lord , Linux Kernel List , , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [Kiobuf-io-devel] RFC: Kernel mechanism: Compound event wait In-Reply-To: <20010206212503.A5426@caldera.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > The second is that bh's are two things: > > - a cacheing object > - an io buffer > > This is not really an clean appropeach, and I would really like to get > away from it. caching bmap() blocks was a recent addition around 2.3.20, and i suggested some time ago to cache pagecache blocks via explicit entries in struct page. That would be one solution - but it creates overhead. but there isnt anything wrong with having the bhs around to cache blocks - think of it as a 'cached and recycled IO buffer entry, with the block information cached'. frankly, my quick (and limited) hack to abuse bhs to cache blocks just cannot be a reason to replace bhs ... Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/