[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49DBAD5B.7010107@garzik.org>
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:45:31 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ray Lee <ray-lk@...rabbit.org>, Hua Zhong <hzhong@...il.com>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes
Mark Lord wrote:
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 7 Apr 2009, Mark Lord wrote:
>>> What happens with ext3 "writeback", and ext4 "whatever",
>>> when one does the quickie reboot method:
>>>
>>> ALT-SYSRQ-S ALT-SYSRQ-U ALT-SYSRQ-S ALT-SYSRQ-B
>>>
>>> ???
>>
>> Since 's' syncs (I think 'u' does too, as part of making things
>> read-only), the data blocks will be on disk after the boot regardless
>> of any other ordering.
> ..
>
> I was thinking more about delayed allocation in ext4, though.
> If it hasn't allocated the blocks, then sync() has nothing to write out.
> Or do they have hooks into the block layer to force alloc/commit when
> somebody does a sync() ??
sync(2) doesn't just sync dirty buffers... it sync's inodes, which
pokes the filesystem to do something intelligent, perhaps triggering (a)
write-out of data, (b) write-out of zeroed blocks, or (c) annotation in
filesystem metadata that certain blocks are allocated, but not initialized.
Jeff
--
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