[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1237210214.30224.3.camel@think.oraclecorp.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 09:30:14 -0400
From: Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, david@...morbit.com,
npiggin@...e.de, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] writeback: switch to per-bdi threads for flushing
data
On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 06:22 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 03:33:43PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > +static void bdi_kupdated(struct backing_dev_info *bdi)
> > +{
> > + long nr_to_write;
> > + struct writeback_control wbc = {
> > + .bdi = bdi,
> > + .sync_mode = WB_SYNC_NONE,
> > + .nr_to_write = 0,
> > + .for_kupdate = 1,
> > + .range_cyclic = 1,
> > + };
> > +
> > + sync_supers();
>
> Not directly related to your patch, but can someone explain WTF
> sync_supers is doing here or in the old kupdated? We're writing back
> dirty pages from the VM, and for some reason we try to also write back
> superblocks. This doesn't really make any sense.
Some of our poor filesystem cousins don't write the super until kupdate
kicks them (see ext2_write_super). kupdate has always been the periodic
FS thread of last resort.
-chris
--
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