> As for aio-direct... Two questions:
> * had anybody tried to measure the effect on branch predictor from
> introducing that method vector? Commit d6afd4c4 ("iov_iter: hide iovec
> details behind ops function pointers")
FWIW, I never did. I only went that route to begin with because the
As for aio-direct... Two questions:
* had anybody tried to measure the effect on branch predictor from
introducing that method vector? Commit d6afd4c4 (iov_iter: hide iovec
details behind ops function pointers)
FWIW, I never did. I only went that route to begin with because the few
On 09/17/2013 09:00 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:56:38AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi Al,
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got conflicts in fs/nfs/direct.c
>> and fs/nfs/file.c between commits b9517433d65d ("dio: Convert direct_IO
>> to use iov_iter"),
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:56:38AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Al,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got conflicts in fs/nfs/direct.c
> and fs/nfs/file.c between commits b9517433d65d ("dio: Convert direct_IO
> to use iov_iter"), a8431c667ae8 ("nfs: add support for read_iter,
>
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got conflicts in fs/nfs/direct.c
and fs/nfs/file.c between commits b9517433d65d ("dio: Convert direct_IO
to use iov_iter"), a8431c667ae8 ("nfs: add support for read_iter,
write_iter") and a1b8ec384b73 ("nfs: simplify swap") from the aio-direct
tree
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got conflicts in fs/nfs/direct.c
and fs/nfs/file.c between commits b9517433d65d (dio: Convert direct_IO
to use iov_iter), a8431c667ae8 (nfs: add support for read_iter,
write_iter) and a1b8ec384b73 (nfs: simplify swap) from the aio-direct
tree and
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:56:38AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got conflicts in fs/nfs/direct.c
and fs/nfs/file.c between commits b9517433d65d (dio: Convert direct_IO
to use iov_iter), a8431c667ae8 (nfs: add support for read_iter,
On 09/17/2013 09:00 PM, Al Viro wrote:
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:56:38AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got conflicts in fs/nfs/direct.c
and fs/nfs/file.c between commits b9517433d65d (dio: Convert direct_IO
to use iov_iter), a8431c667ae8
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in fs/direct-io.c
between commit 8f2a7fbb9b10 ("dio: add bio_vec support to
__blockdev_direct_IO()") from the aio-direct tree and commit 7b7a8665edd8
("direct-io: Implement generic deferred AIO completions") from the vfs
tree.
I
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in fs/block_dev.c
between commit b176eedb2a8b ("block_dev: add support for read_iter,
write_iter") from the aio-direct tree and commit 02afc27faec9
("direct-io: Handle O_(D)SYNC AIO") from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in fs/block_dev.c
between commit b176eedb2a8b (block_dev: add support for read_iter,
write_iter) from the aio-direct tree and commit 02afc27faec9
(direct-io: Handle O_(D)SYNC AIO) from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in fs/direct-io.c
between commit 8f2a7fbb9b10 (dio: add bio_vec support to
__blockdev_direct_IO()) from the aio-direct tree and commit 7b7a8665edd8
(direct-io: Implement generic deferred AIO completions) from the vfs
tree.
I fixed it
12 matches
Mail list logo
