lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jun]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: bio_chain: proposed solution for bio_alloc failure and large IO simplification
    Jens Axboe wrote:
    >
    > ...
    > > What I did, and what I'd suggest as a convention is:
    > >
    > > During BIO assembly, bi_vcnt indicates the maximum number of
    > > bvecs which the BIO can hold. And bi_idx indexes the next-free
    > > bvec within the BIO.
    >
    > Hmm I don't like that too much. For reference, bi_vcnt from the block
    > layer is the number of bio_vecs in the bio. And bi_idx is the index into
    > the 'current' bio_vec. To tie that in with the above, how about just
    > changing bi_max to be a real number. Internal bio can still find the
    > pool from that, and private bios can just fill it out.

    But then bi_max is the _actual_ size of the BIO, and not the
    size which the caller requested.

    umm, err, actually, that suits me just fine ;) We could leave
    bi_size as-is and just implement

    unsigned bio_nr_bvecs(struct bio *bio);

    But that may not work for privately allocated BIOs. "bios not
    coming from bio_alloc()"?

    What _are_ these private BIOs, anyway? Is any in-kernel code
    constructing them at present?

    -
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:26    [W:0.024 / U:0.340 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site