[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrU_e309onJKGg4EK2EyiZWCjNROsw83+VAK=2i_FVLWYg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 20:30:02 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, xfs@....sgi.com,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] ext4: Defer mmap cmtime update until writeback
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 7:38 PM, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 04:22:12PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> A fancier implementation could probably avoid an extra journal
>> transaction by adding a mapping_test_clear_cmtime call in
>> ext4_writepages, but this should already be a considerable
>> improvement -- we'll start one transaction per writepages call
>> instead of one per page.
>
> I'd like to see more than just an ext4 implementation - btrfs and
> XFS are the other main filesystems that should behave identically.
Will do.
>
> Also, it's worthwhile to write a generic xfstest to ensure that they
> all update the timestamp appropriately - if its' in xfstests, then
> we can basically guarantee that it won't get randomly regressed in
> future, and other filesystems can be easily verified as well sa
> their implement this.
>
Is there a guide to writing an xfstest? I've already written it as a
standalone C program, so I assume it's easy.
--Andy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists