[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BANLkTikE46adv1PvGRKOcREUi-FQN7WmhQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 19:05:44 +0200
From: richard -rw- weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>
To: Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, hch@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: push i_mutex and filemap_write_and_wait down into
->fsync() handlers
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com> wrote:
> Btrfs needs to be able to control how filemap_write_and_wait_range() is called
> in fsync to make it less of a painful operation, so push down taking i_mutex and
> the calling of filemap_write_and_wait() down into the ->fsync() handlers. Some
> file systems can drop taking the i_mutex altogether it seems, like ext3 and
> ocfs2. For correctness sake I just pushed everything down in all cases to make
> sure that we keep the current behavior the same for everybody, and then each
> individual fs maintainer can make up their mind about what to do from there.
> Thanks,
>
> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>
A small note from checkpatch.pl:
ERROR: "foo * bar" should be "foo *bar"
#1109: FILE: fs/hostfs/hostfs_kern.c:367:
+ struct inode * inode = file->f_mapping->host;
--
Thanks,
//richard
--
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