Received: by 2002:a25:d7c1:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o184csp5353980ybg; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 01:48:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyrWNpO93iIX6VlbLMceqZgZsKEAU4ur9C/t3OqhuGjdzAOuCO3i6QH89MlAOT2UTtuKS3F X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:1f57:: with SMTP id d23mr3142118ejk.233.1571734108612; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 01:48:28 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1571734108; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=RHMjEKAv19jlUuJ8gCQB/ABna3Rrn+TPAkaJIKNhhPIKgwbXyhptj/aaPbZWfVwt/g LnVD0AGdfnrkoUZBNssBZEZxXzglUXvpj7G0t6RePGNLnjBJA6i8lCkqcujB9/TdjXYo oLsuBJoDuAc9Px20ZXTYG4U7T4a1vLcvC3SWL5BYRc0eiXYkMCr1ZdICMuHeS1tpopAa ri6QCUrD/RX7f9Vu6nXGlqo+YWOrIm33eJ+j+2lV75LHXMsb1n72IewYaO1wKCNSLEuA 9GnbpTUxIFKFz3Pib4p6ROWWwqtpip/7POI1ygsVenTa0A4hvE7ItEqey/8EaLC1fxyy /ofA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=12x6mkCkrK1LbTWX13Jr/p4h/NLkaSvMImoOWHZqVo0=; b=jVp7f4RzM988xUiEnbe5Tcg7J6Zp5IlFtmf3I3yK8iFluzBSSElj1IfYwdqUEdyISM IVZ85wOI5ONtDeS0nNpjs/ra3bFgMGqWT+HIGrvqzFLphgV8O1EG3zz9F8VC3gSXMY4N ii0NfEm+/YZ4YQezYGbtUn6H3Kdzf5ckNz80f9YkbNdfeduRSycGEKCVl3vM4oy9Hu70 sWBw8Tdit5ETsk4VZRou7hv1WJCCVGpQjGr07s7PmxxpA3QNihOYbz0kjbMYJBQculBc 9fLHF6wui5CnvkmlzuqERHK+eQFPz0QP7JgHMB1kSg/ZeeUSIM5tKTLnW/ll1F1caaUJ V7Gw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id b15si3180123eda.174.2019.10.22.01.48.04; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 01:48:28 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388643AbfJVIp0 (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 22 Oct 2019 04:45:26 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:54614 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2388490AbfJVIp0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Oct 2019 04:45:26 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62417B170; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 08:45:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by quack2.suse.cz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 411851E4862; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 09:50:35 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 09:50:35 +0200 From: Jan Kara To: Matthew Bobrowski Cc: Jan Kara , tytso@mit.edu, adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, hch@infradead.org, david@fromorbit.com, darrick.wong@oracle.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 08/12] ext4: update direct I/O read to do trylock in IOCB_NOWAIT cases Message-ID: <20191022075035.GA2436@quack2.suse.cz> References: <5ee370a435eb08fb14579c7c197b16e9fa0886f0.1571647179.git.mbobrowski@mbobrowski.org> <20191021134817.GG25184@quack2.suse.cz> <20191022020421.GE5092@athena.bobrowski.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191022020421.GE5092@athena.bobrowski.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org On Tue 22-10-19 13:04:21, Matthew Bobrowski wrote: > On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 03:48:17PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Mon 21-10-19 20:18:46, Matthew Bobrowski wrote: > > > This patch updates the lock pattern in ext4_dio_read_iter() to only > > > perform the trylock in IOCB_NOWAIT cases. > > > > The changelog is actually misleading. It should say something like "This > > patch updates the lock pattern in ext4_dio_read_iter() to not block on > > inode lock in case of IOCB_NOWAIT direct IO reads." > > > > Also to ease backporting of easy fixes, we try to put patches like this > > early in the series (fixing code in ext4_direct_IO_read(), and then the > > fixed code would just carry over to ext4_dio_read_iter()). > > OK, understood. Now I know this for next time. :) > > Providing that I have this patch precede the ext4_dio_read_iter() > patch and implement this lock pattern in ext4_direct_IO_read(), am I > OK to add the 'Reviewed-by' tag? Yes. Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR