[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1332424772.18717.37.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 15:59:32 +0200
From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: Ted Tso <tytso@....edu>,
Ext4 Mailing List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux FS Maling List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Maling List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/9] do not use s_dirt in ext4
On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 14:42 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > But AFAIKC, the whole '__ext4_handle_dirty_super()' also falls-back to
> > marking the superblock as dirty if the file-system has no journal for
> > some reasons, right?
> Yes. And I wrote that if you do sync_buffer(EXT4_SB(sb)->s_sbh) instead
> of marking superblock dirty, it would be fine.
OK, sorry for not reading carefully, I will take a look at this and all
the places where we use 's_dirt' and try to think how to just eliminate
them. But since I have 0 experience with ext4, I'll probably need some
help, but let's see.
Thanks for reviewing and the feed-back!
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists