From: Waiman Long Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] ext4: Pass in DIO_SKIP_DIO_COUNT flag if inode_dio_begin() called Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 12:32:17 -0400 Message-ID: <571F9811.20305@hpe.com> References: <1460484775-33359-1-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hpe.com> <1460484775-33359-2-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hpe.com> <20160420205801.GA24609@infradead.org> <571918BC.2060007@hpe.com> <20160425114802.GA15856@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Theodore Ts'o , Andreas Dilger , , , Tejun Heo , Christoph Lameter , Scott J Norton , Douglas Hatch , Toshimitsu Kani To: Christoph Hellwig Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160425114802.GA15856@infradead.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On 04/25/2016 07:48 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 02:15:24PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: >> On 04/20/2016 04:58 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>> FYI, none of the Dax code even needs to ever touch the dio_count, >>> as dax I/O can't be asynchronous, and we thus don't need it to protect >>> against truncate. I'd suggest to remove it and then end_io callback >> >from the DAX code entirely as a start and then move from there. >> >> Yes, it seems like we may not need to change the dio_count in dax_do_io() >> after all. BTW, what do mean by using end_io callback as a start? > I mean to remove both the i_dio_count manipulation, and the unessecary > end_io callback from dax_do_io. Thanks for the clarification. Since DAX I/O is always synchronous, the locking done by the caller or in the dax_do_Io() for read should be enough to prevent truncation from happening at the same time. So we don't need to use i_dio_count for that purpose. However, I have not understood enough of the block IO layer to determine if the end_io callback is really redundant. I am not confident enough to touch the end_io callback. Cheers, Longman