[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1332924282.31549.51.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 11:44:42 +0300
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
Thanks for the patches.
On Tue, 2012-03-27 at 22:14 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> @@ -181,9 +181,22 @@ static int ext4_file_open(struct inode * inode, struct file * filp)
> path.dentry = mnt->mnt_root;
> cp = d_path(&path, buf, sizeof(buf));
> if (!IS_ERR(cp)) {
> + handle_t *handle;
> + int err;
> +
> + handle = ext4_journal_start_sb(sb, 1);
> + if (IS_ERR(handle))
> + return PTR_ERR(handle);
> + err = ext4_journal_get_write_access(handle,
> + EXT4_SB(sb)->s_sbh);
Why do we need to bother with journal in this case - AFAIU, we update a
single field, not critical, and we do not really need the journal for
this - we can just call 'mark_buffer_dirty(sbi->s_sbh)' and let the SB
be written out directly and asynchronously.
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists