[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070823023306.GM61154114@sgi.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 12:33:06 +1000
From: David Chinner <dgc@....com>
To: Fengguang Wu <wfg@...l.ustc.edu.cn>
Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, Ken Chen <kenchen@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] writeback time order/delay fixes take 3
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 09:18:41AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 08:23:14PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> Notes:
> (1) I'm not sure inode number is correlated to disk location in
> filesystems other than ext2/3/4. Or parent dir?
The correspond to the exact location on disk on XFS. But, XFS has it's
own inode clustering (see xfs_iflush) and it can't be moved up
into the generic layers because of locking and integration into
the transaction subsystem.
> (2) It duplicates some function of elevators. Why is it necessary?
The elevators have no clue as to how the filesystem might treat adjacent
inodes. In XFS, inode clustering is a fundamental feature of the inode
reading and writing and that is something no elevator can hope to
acheive....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
Principal Engineer
SGI Australian Software Group
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists