Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:44:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:44:45 -0500 Received: from mg02.austin.ibm.com ([192.35.232.12]:59086 "EHLO mg02.austin.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:44:42 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Kevin Corry Organization: IBM To: Denis Vlasenko , Joe Thornber Subject: Re: [PATCH] dm.c - device-mapper I/O path fixes Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:06:00 -0600 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2] Cc: Kernel Mailing List , lvm-devel@sistina.com References: <02121016034706.02220@boiler> <20021211141820.GA21461@reti> <200212111435.gBBEYWa06788@Port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua> In-Reply-To: <200212111435.gBBEYWa06788@Port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <02121108060005.29515@boiler> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1793 Lines: 42 On Wednesday 11 December 2002 13:24, Denis Vlasenko wrote: > On 11 December 2002 12:18, Joe Thornber wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 07:16:53AM -0600, Kevin Corry wrote: > > > However, it might be a good idea to consider how bio's keep track > > > of errors. When a bio is created, it is marked UPTODATE. Then, if > > > any part of a bio takes an error, the UPTODATE flag is turned off. > > > When the whole bio completes, if the UPTODATE flag is still on, > > > there were no errors during the i/o. Perhaps the "error" field in > > > "struct dm_io" could be modified to use this method of error > > > tracking? Then we could change dec_pending() to be something like: > > > > > > if (error) > > > clear_bit(DM_IO_UPTODATE, &io->error); > > > > > > with a "set_bit(DM_IO_UPTODATE, &ci.io->error);" in __bio_split(). > > > > The problem with this is you don't keep track of the specific error > > to later pass to bio_endio(io->bio...). I guess it all comes down to > > just how expensive that spin lock is; and since locking only occurs > > when there's an error I'm happy with things as they are. > > lock(); > a = b; > unlock(); > > Store of ints is atomic anyway. You need locking if a is a larger entity, > say, a struct. Storing an int is *not* atomic unless it is declared as atomic_t and you use the appropriate macros (see include/asm-*/atomic.h). Remember, we are talking about a field in a data structure that can be accessed from multiple threads on multiple CPUs. -- Kevin Corry corryk@us.ibm.com http://evms.sourceforge.net/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/