Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 15:18:30 -0400
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, dm-devel@redhat.com,
        Joe Thornber <ejt@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-4.2 04/14] block: factor out
 blkdev_issue_discard_async
Message-ID: <20150518191830.GA15656@redhat.com>
References: <1431637512-64245-1-git-send-email-snitzer@redhat.com>
 <1431637512-64245-5-git-send-email-snitzer@redhat.com>
 <20150518082756.GB5439@infradead.org>
 <20150518133223.GC13998@redhat.com>
 <20150518161721.GA28385@infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150518161721.GA28385@infradead.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1701
Lines: 37

On Mon, May 18 2015 at 12:17pm -0400,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 09:32:23AM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > The proposed blkdev_issue_discard_async interface allows DM (or any
> > caller) to not have to concern itself with how discard(s) gets issued.
> > 
> > It leaves all the details of how large a discard can be, etc to block
> > core.  The entire point of doing things this way is to _not_ pollute DM
> > with code that breaks up a discard into N bios based on the discard
> > limits of the underlying device.
> > 
> > What you're suggesting sounds a lot like having DM open code
> > blkdev_issue_discard() -- blkdev_issue_discard_async() was engineered to
> > avoid that completely.
> 
> Parts of it anyway.  The splitting logic can still be factored into
> helpers to keep the nasty details out of DM.  But except for that I
> think async discards should be handled exactly like async reads, writes
> or flushes.

OK.

> And besides that generic high level sentiment I think the interface
> for blkdev_issue_discard_async is simply wrong.  Either you want to keep
> the internals private and just expose a completion callback that gets
> your private data and an error, or you want to build your own bios as
> suggested above.  But not one that is mostly opaque except for allowing
> the caller to hook into the submission process and thus taking over I/O
> completion.

I'll see what I can come up with.
--
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/