Return-Path: Received: from mail-pl1-f195.google.com ([209.85.214.195]:34198 "EHLO mail-pl1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726343AbeKUNxZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Nov 2018 08:53:25 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH V10 09/19] block: introduce bio_bvecs() To: Ming Lei Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Jens Axboe , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Dave Chinner , Kent Overstreet , Mike Snitzer , dm-devel@redhat.com, Alexander Viro , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Shaohua Li , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org, David Sterba , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, "Darrick J . Wong" , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Gao Xiang , Theodore Ts'o , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Coly Li , linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org, Boaz Harrosh , Bob Peterson , cluster-devel@redhat.com References: <20181115085306.9910-1-ming.lei@redhat.com> <20181115085306.9910-10-ming.lei@redhat.com> <20181116134541.GH3165@lst.de> <002fe56b-25e4-573e-c09b-bb12c3e8d25a@grimberg.me> <20181120161651.GB2629@lst.de> <53526aae-fb9b-ee38-0a01-e5899e2d4e4d@grimberg.me> <20181121005902.GA31748@ming.t460p> From: Sagi Grimberg Message-ID: <2d9bee7a-f010-dcf4-1184-094101058584@grimberg.me> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 19:20:45 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20181121005902.GA31748@ming.t460p> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > Not sure I understand the 'blocking' problem in this case. > > We can build a bvec table from this req, and send them all > in send(), I would like to avoid growing bvec tables and keep everything preallocated. Plus, a bvec_iter operates on a bvec which means we'll need a table there as well... Not liking it so far... > can this way avoid your blocking issue? You may see this > example in branch 'rq->bio != rq->biotail' of lo_rw_aio(). This is exactly an example of not ignoring the bios... > If this way is what you need, I think you are right, even we may > introduce the following helpers: > > rq_for_each_bvec() > rq_bvecs() I'm not sure how this helps me either. Unless we can set a bvec_iter to span bvecs or have an abstract bio crossing when we re-initialize the bvec_iter I don't see how I can ignore bios completely... > So looks nvme-tcp host driver might be the 2nd driver which benefits > from multi-page bvec directly. > > The multi-page bvec V11 has passed my tests and addressed almost > all the comments during review on V10. I removed bio_vecs() in V11, > but it won't be big deal, we can introduce them anytime when there > is the requirement. multipage-bvecs and nvme-tcp are going to conflict, so it would be good to coordinate on this. I think that nvme-tcp host needs some adjustments as setting a bvec_iter. I'm under the impression that the change is rather small and self-contained, but I'm not sure I have the full picture here.