[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080520023454.GM15035@mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 22:34:55 -0400
From: Theodore Tso <tytso@....EDU>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
Cc: ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] ext4: call blkdev_issue_flush on fsync
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 02:09:56PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> To ensure that bits are truly on-disk after an fsync,
> we should call blkdev_issue_flush if barriers are supported.
This patch isn't necessary, and in fact will cause a double flush.
When you call fsync(), it calls ext4_force_commit(), and we do a the
equivalent of a blkdev_issue_flush() today (which is what happenes
when you do a submit_bh(WRITE_BARRIER, bh), which is what setting
set_ordered_mode(bh) ends up causing.
- Ted
--
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