Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757270AbYBQXb7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:31:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755341AbYBQXbu (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:31:50 -0500 Received: from relay2.sgi.com ([192.48.171.30]:34036 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754891AbYBQXbt (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:31:49 -0500 Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 10:31:23 +1100 From: David Chinner To: Michael Tokarev Cc: Andi Kleen , dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Implement barrier support for single device DM devices Message-ID: <20080217233123.GA155407@sgi.com> References: <20080215120821.GA8267@basil.nowhere.org> <20080215122002.GM29914@agk.fab.redhat.com> <47B58EAA.8040405@msgid.tls.msk.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47B58EAA.8040405@msgid.tls.msk.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1594 Lines: 46 On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 04:07:54PM +0300, Michael Tokarev wrote: > Alasdair G Kergon wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 01:08:21PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > >> Implement barrier support for single device DM devices > > > > Thanks. We've got some (more-invasive) dm patches in the works that > > attempt to use flushing to emulate barriers where we can't just > > pass them down like that. > > I wonder if it's worth the effort to try to implement this. > > As far as I understand (*), if a filesystem realizes that the > underlying block device does not support barriers, it will > switch to using regular flushes instead No, typically the filesystems won't issue flushes, either. > - isn't it the same > thing as you're trying to do on an MD level? > > Note that a filesystem must understand barriers/flushes on > underlying block device, since many disk drives don't support > barriers anyway. > > (*) this is, in fact, an interesting question. I still can't > find complete information about this. For example, how safe > xfs is if barriers are not supported or turned off? Is it > "less safe" than with barriers? Will it use regular cache > flushes if barriers are not here? Try reading at the XFS FAQ: http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/faq/#wcache Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/