On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 07:23:09PM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 01:55:11PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
[ ... fsblocks vs extent range mapping ]
> iomaps can double as range locks simply because iomaps are
> expressions of ranges within the file. Seeing as you can only
> access a given range exclusively to modify it, inserting an empty
> mapping into the tree as a range lock gives an effective method of
> allowing safe parallel reads, writes and allocation into the file.
>
> The fsblocks and the vm page cache interface cannot be used to
> facilitate this because a radix tree is the wrong type of tree to
> store this information in. A sparse, range based tree (e.g. btree)
> is the right way to do this and it matches very well with
> a range based API.
I'm really not against the extent based page cache idea, but I kind of
assumed it would be too big a change for this kind of generic setup. At
any rate, if we'd like to do it, it may be best to ditch the idea of
"attach mapping information to a page", and switch to "lookup mapping
information and range locking for a page".
A btree could be used to hold the range mapping and locking, but it
could just as easily be a radix tree where you do a gang lookup for the
end of the range (the same way my placeholder patch did). It'll still
find intersecting range locks but is much faster for random
insertion/deletion than the btrees.
-chris
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
