[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87y5pyfoe0.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp>
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 22:12:39 +0900
From: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
To: dedekind1@...il.com
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Maling List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux FS Maling List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Artem Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] fat: switch to fsinfo_inode
Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com> writes:
> On Sat, 2012-04-14 at 20:51 +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
>> Yes, I still worry about order. About ->sync_fs(), you are looking the
>> following?
>
> Hirofumi, you still did not explain why the order matters. If it
> matters, it should be easy to explain.
>
> But I will look at this and think about the ordering, thanks for
> feed-back. But if you could explain why writing out FSINFO before inodes
> is an issue, it'd be very helpful.
Hm, you want to this one?
If fsinfo is inode, the order can be
1) flush inodes
1a) flush fsinfo inode
1b) flush normal inodes
2) last iput(normal inodes)
truncate()
dirty fsinfo inode
--
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
--
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