[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F917C2F.4020805@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 10:09:35 -0500
From: Dave Kleikamp <dave.kleikamp@...cle.com>
To: "Maxim V. Patlasov" <mpatlasov@...allels.com>
CC: "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Zach Brown <zab@...bo.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 15/21] loop: use aio to perform io on the underlying
file
On 04/20/2012 09:48 AM, Maxim V. Patlasov wrote:
> On 03/30/2012 07:43 PM, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
>> From: Zach Brown<zab@...bo.net>
>>
>> This uses the new kernel aio interface to process loopback IO by
>> submitting concurrent direct aio. Previously loop's IO was serialized
>> by synchronous processing in a thread.
>>
>
> The patch ignores REQ_FLUSH bit of bi_rw. Is it simply overlook?
Good question. Since the loop device is sending only direct IO requests,
it shouldn't be necessary to explicitly flush page cache, but REQ_FLUSH
also guarantees that previous writes make it to media before the current
write, so it looks like I need to add an explicit vfs_fsync() in the new
path (conditional on REQ_FLUSH of course).
Zach, thoughts?
Shaggy
>
> Thanks,
> Maxim
--
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