linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: block tree build failure

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 7 Jul 2009 09:57:06 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: block tree build failure

On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 08:38:46AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >  SYSCALL_DEFINE0(sync)
> >  {
> > -	wakeup_pdflush(0);
> > +	wakeup_flusher_threads(0);
> >  	sync_filesystems(0);
> >  	sync_filesystems(1);
> >  	if (unlikely(laptop_mode))
> 
> That is correct! I have just now updated for-next as well, so your next
> pull should lose this fixup.

It's not correct at all.  We'll how have various flusher threads doing
async syncs, just to wait for them again synchronously.  The right thing
to do here is to queue up the data integrity sync to per-bdi threads and
execute those in parallel.

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