Date:   Tue, 4 Jan 2022 13:15:09 -0800
From:   Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
To:     Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
Cc:     Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 5/6] f2fs: implement iomap operations
Message-ID: <YdS43f15g1enklVX@google.com>
References: <b36e2d44-4834-3931-6a32-4fa52d1d7785@kernel.org>
 <YahIf3UlhuxJT1O4@sol.localdomain>
 <1ba0f002-42c7-b085-0c54-6071664ba79b@kernel.org>
 <YakPrVPz5+qQm3kQ@sol.localdomain>
 <YakXMV0UvBV7TVwe@google.com>
 <YakX38onzsW5Ef8B@google.com>
 <YakzVAkHAVMueJwe@sol.localdomain>
 <Yak4cxU6htgQk7ck@google.com>
 <Yak6gtXthBRK3eeM@google.com>
 <ed10bb7a-af8c-d5a6-8bb1-a47559f78fbf@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ed10bb7a-af8c-d5a6-8bb1-a47559f78fbf@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk

On 12/30, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2021/12/3 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 12/02, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > On 12/02, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Dec 02, 2021 at 11:00:47AM -0800, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > > > On 12/02, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > > > > On 12/02, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 02, 2021 at 10:04:11PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 2021/12/2 12:15, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 02, 2021 at 11:10:41AM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Why not relocating this check before f2fs_map_blocks()?
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Wait, it supports DIO in multi-device image after commit 	71f2c8206202
> > > > > > > > ("f2fs: multidevice: support direct IO"), how about
> > > > > > > > checking with f2fs_allow_multi_device_dio()?
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Okay, that was not the case when I sent this patch originally.  We'll need to
> > > > > > > update this to support multiple devices.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Chao/Eric, does this make sense?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > > > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > > > > > @@ -4070,11 +4070,10 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, loff_t length,
> > > > > >                  }
> > > > > >                  if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!__is_valid_data_blkaddr(map.m_pblk)))
> > > > > >                          return -EINVAL;
> > > > > > -               iomap->addr = blks_to_bytes(inode, map.m_pblk);
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -               if (WARN_ON_ONCE(f2fs_is_multi_device(F2FS_I_SB(inode))))
> > > > > > -                       return -EINVAL;
> > > > > > -               iomap->bdev = inode->i_sb->s_bdev;
> > > > > > +               iomap->bdev = map->m_multidev_dio ? map.m_bdev :
> > > > > 
> > > > > correction:			map.m_multidev_dio
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > I guess so, but why doesn't f2fs_map_blocks() just always set m_bdev to the
> > > > correct block device?  What is the point of m_multidev_dio?
> > > 
> > > It seems we can simply assign iomap->bdev = map.m_bdev, and remove
> > > map->m_multidev_dio.
> > 
> > Ok, it was used in previous get_block flow, but I think it'd be worth to keep it
> > to show by f2fs_map_blocks tracepoint.
> 
> The last version wasn't sent into mailing list?

No, will post it again soon.

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > - Eric
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
> > > Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
> > Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel