[lkml]   [2006]   [Jul]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [3/4] kevent: AIO, aio_sendfile() implementation.
    On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 02:08:49PM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
    > On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 11:00:13AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig ( wrote:
    > > > struct address_space_operations ext2_aops = {
    > > > + .get_block = ext2_get_block,
    > >
    > > No way in hell. For whatever you do please provide a interface at
    > > the readpage/writepage/sendfile/etc abstraction layer. get_block is
    > > nothing that can be exposed to the common code.
    > Compare this with sync read methods - all they do is exactly the same
    > operations with low-level blocks, which are combined into nice exported
    > function, so there is _no_ readpage layer - it calls only one function
    > which works with blocks.

    No. The abtraction layer there is ->readpage(s). _A_ common implementation
    works with a get_block callback from the filesystem, but there are various
    others. We've been there before, up to mid-2.3.x we had a get_block inode
    operation and we got rid of it because it is the wrong abstraction.

    > So it is not a technical problem, but political one.

    It's a technical problem, and it's called get you abstractions right. And
    ontop of that a political one and that's called get your abstraction coherent.
    If you managed to argue all of us into accept that get_block is the right
    abstraction (and as I mentioned above that's technically not true) you'd
    still have the burden to update everything to use the same abstraction.
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-07-26 12:17    [W:0.020 / U:1.084 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site