[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1334326795-2446-1-git-send-email-dedekind1@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 17:19:51 +0300
From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
To: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Maling List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux FS Maling List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v2 v2 0/4] do not use s_dirt in FAT FS
This is version 2 of the patch-set which makes FAT file-system stop using
the VFS '->write_super()' method for writing out the FSINFO block. The fist
version can be found here: http://lkml.org/lkml/2012/4/11/147
Comparing to v1, this patch takes a completely different approach. Instead of
using a delayed job, we introduce a special inode for the FSINFO block, mark
it as dirty when needed, and use generic inode write-back mechanisms to write
the FSINFO block via '->write_inode()'. I think this is much cleaner.
Let me recap why I am doing this, and the current status of this exercises.
The final goal is to get rid of the 'sync_supers()' kernel thread. This kernel
thread wakes up every 5 seconds (by default) and calls '->write_super()' for
all mounted file-systems. And the bad thing is that this is done even if all
the superblocks are clean. Moreover, some file-systems do not even need this
end they do not register the '->write_super()' method at all (e.g., btrfs).
So 'sync_supers()' most often just generates useless wake-ups and wastes power.
I am trying to make all file-systems independent of '->write_super()' and plan
to remove 'sync_supers()' and '->write_super' completely once there are no more
users.
The '->write_supers()' method is mostly used by baroque file-systems like hfs,
udf, etc. Modern file-systems like btrfs and xfs do not use it. This justifies
removing this stuff from VFS completely and make every FS self-manage own
superblock.
Tested with xfstests.
Note: in the past I was trying to upstream patches which optimized 'sync_super()',
but Al Viro wanted me to kill it completely instead, which I am trying to do
now, see http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/7/22/96
======
Overall status:
1. ext4: patches submitted, waiting for reply from Ted Ts'o:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/4/2/111
2. ext2: patches are in the ext2 tree maintained by Jan Kara:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jack/linux-fs.git for_next
However, one patch is still not there:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-ext4/msg31492.html
TODO: affs, exofs, hfs, hfsplus, jffs2, reiserfs, sysv, udf, ufs
======
fs/fat/fat.h | 1 +
fs/fat/fatent.c | 22 +++++++++++++-----
fs/fat/inode.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
include/linux/msdos_fs.h | 3 +-
4 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
Thanks,
Artem.
--
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