lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Apr]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v8 10/18] dax, dm: introduce ->fs_{claim, release}() dax_device infrastructure
On Tue, Apr 03 2018 at  2:24pm -0400,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 9:03 PM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
> > In preparation for allowing filesystems to augment the dev_pagemap
> > associated with a dax_device, add an ->fs_claim() callback. The
> > ->fs_claim() callback is leveraged by the device-mapper dax
> > implementation to iterate all member devices in the map and repeat the
> > claim operation across the array.
> >
> > In order to resolve collisions between filesystem operations and DMA to
> > DAX mapped pages we need a callback when DMA completes. With a callback
> > we can hold off filesystem operations while DMA is in-flight and then
> > resume those operations when the last put_page() occurs on a DMA page.
> > The ->fs_claim() operation arranges for this callback to be registered,
> > although that implementation is saved for a later patch.
> >
> > Cc: Alasdair Kergon <agk@redhat.com>
> > Cc: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
>
> Mike, do these DM touches look ok to you? We need these ->fs_claim()
> / ->fs_release() interfaces for device-mapper to set up filesystem-dax
> infrastructure on all sub-devices whenever a dax-capable DM device is
> mounted. It builds on the device-mapper dax dependency removal
> patches.

I'd prefer dm_dax_iterate() be renamed to dm_dax_iterate_devices()

But dm_dax_iterate() is weird... it is simply returning the struct
dax_device *dax_dev that is passed: seemingly without actually directly
changing anything about that dax_device (I can infer that you're
claiming the underlying devices, but...)

In general user's of ti->type->iterate_devices can get a result back
(via 'int' return).. you aren't using it that way (and maybe dax will
never have a need to return an answer). But all said, I think I'd
prefer to see dm_dax_iterate_devices() return void.

But please let me know if I'm missing something, thanks.

Mike

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-04-03 21:39    [W:0.146 / U:5.020 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site