lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jun]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRE: [patch] pipe: add support for shrinking and growing pipes
Date
From
> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-kernel-
> owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Linus Torvalds
> Sent: June 01, 2010 11:22 AM
>
> On Tue, 1 Jun 2010, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >
> > > Also, the minuimum size of the buffer is 2 pages. Why is it not 1?
> > > (Notwithstanding Linus's assertion, a buffer size of 1 page did
> give us POSIX compliance in kernels before 2.6.10.)
> >
> > I'll defer to Linus on that, I remember some emails on that part
from
> > way back when. As far as I can tell, POSIX wants atomic writes of
> > "less than a page size", which would make more sense as "of a page
size and
> > less". And since it should not be a page size from either side on a
> > uni-directional pipe, then 1 page seems enough for that guarantee at
> > least.
>
> Hmm. You guys may well be right that a single slot is sufficient. It
> still gives us PIPE_BUF worth of data for writing atomically. I had
this
> memory that we needed two because of the merging logic (we have that
special
> case for re-using the previous page, so that we don't use waste of
memory
> for lots of small writes), but looking at the code there is no reason
at
> all for me to hav thought so.
>
> So I don't know why I thought we needed the extra slot, and a single
> slot (if anybody really wants slow writes) looks to be fine.
>

Ok, I have a really dumb/basic question. The reason we are letting users
grow the pipe->buffers is to decrease the number of splice-calls. This
implies the user has fnctl'd(when he/she wants performance). Can we not
have an option where we don't have to 'alloc pipe->buffers' worth pages
every single time? As an example look at 'default_file_splice_read'. Is
it possible to enhance the existing functionality by defining a new cmd
and a flag(in struct pipe_xxx etc) and allowing an user to control that?
Something like 'fcntl->F_SETPIPE_SZ_AND_LOCK_PIPE_PAGES'? Does this make
sense?

regards
Chetan Loke


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-06-01 18:45    [W:1.205 / U:0.412 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site