[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C007A0F.6020304@jaysonking.com>
Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 21:21:03 -0500
From: "Jayson R. King" <dev@...sonking.com>
To: tytso@....edu
CC: "Jayson R. King" <dev@...sonking.com>,
Stable team <stable@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
Kay Diederichs <Kay.Diederichs@...-konstanz.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.27.y 1/3] ext4: Use our own write_cache_pages()
On 05/28/2010 08:41 PM, Jayson R. King wrote:
> On 05/28/2010 07:49 PM, tytso@....edu wrote:
>> This doesn't fix a bug; it's to make it easy for Dave Chinner to make
>> some changes to fix XFS's performance and to undo some ext4-specific
>> changes to write_cache_pages(). I'm not sure there's a good reason to
>> backport this to 2.6.27.y....
>
> The difference is that, 2.6.27's write_cache_pages() in page-writeback.c
> still updates wbc->nr_to_write, since the patch which changed that
> behavior was dropped from .27-rc2 due to the XFS regression it causes on
> mainline.
I meant, it was dropped from .27.47-rc2 stable. Sorry for any confusion.
> ext4 appears to want the behavior of write_cache_pages which
> does not update wbc->nr_to_write. This write_cache_pages_da() does what
> ext4 wants, without introducing the XFS regression. So I believe it is
> needed.
>
> Did I mis-judge?
>
> Rgds,
>
> Jayson
>
--
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