[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110630123759.GA14956@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:37:59 -0400
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Curt Wohlgemuth <curtw@...gle.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
fengguang.wu@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] writeback: Don't wait for completion in
writeback_inodes_sb_nr
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 02:15:58PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> Yes. Actually, specifically for filesystems like XFS which update inode
> after IO completion we would need more passes to be efficient and correct:
> for all inodes
> fdatawrite
> for all inodes
> fdatawait
> for all inodes
> write_inode
> for all inodes
> wait for inode IO
>
> But maybe this could be handled by having new WB_SYNC_ mode indicating
> that writeback_single_inode() should not bother waiting (thus we'd really
> end up waiting in sync_inodes_sb()) and then XFS and other filesystems that
> need it would writeout inodes in their sync_fs() implementation (possibly
> using a generic helper)?
We do very little in write_inode these days. Basically just log the
inode size and timestamp sized into the in-memory log. The actual
writeout of the log happens in ->sync_fs already.
--
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