linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 14/18] writeback: make writeback_control.nr_to

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 20 May 2011 09:29:10 +1000
From:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To:	Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/18] writeback: make writeback_control.nr_to_write
 straight

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 06:06:44AM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> :                 writeback_single_inode(inode, wb, &wbc);
> :                 work->nr_pages -= write_chunk - wbc.nr_to_write;
> :                 wrote += write_chunk - wbc.nr_to_write;
> :                 if (wbc.pages_skipped) {
> :                         /*
> :                          * writeback is not making progress due to locked
> :                          * buffers.  Skip this inode for now.
> :                          */
> :                         redirty_tail(inode, wb);
> : -               }
> : +               } else if (!(inode->i_state & I_DIRTY))
> : +                       wrote++;
> 
> It looks a bit more clean to do
> 
> :                 wrote += write_chunk - wbc.nr_to_write;
> : +               if (!(inode->i_state & I_DIRTY))
> : +                       wrote++;
> :                 if (wbc.pages_skipped) {
> :                         /*
> :                          * writeback is not making progress due to locked
> :                          * buffers.  Skip this inode for now.
> :                          */
> :                         redirty_tail(inode, wb);
> :                 }

But it's still in the wrong place - such post-write inode dirty
processing is supposed to be isolated to writeback_single_inode().
Spreading it across multiple locations is not, IMO, the nicest thing
to do...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
--
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/