Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759194AbZCaEeS (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 00:34:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751713AbZCaEeA (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 00:34:00 -0400 Received: from serv2.oss.ntt.co.jp ([222.151.198.100]:57874 "EHLO serv2.oss.ntt.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751152AbZCaEd7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 00:33:59 -0400 Message-ID: <49D19D35.7020407@oss.ntt.co.jp> Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 13:33:57 +0900 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fernando_Luis_V=E1zquez_Cao?= User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090103) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Theodore Tso , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fernando_Luis_V=E1zq?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?uez_Cao?= , Chris Mason , Eric Sandeen , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix blkdev_issue_flush() failure handling References: <200903291928.14451.bzolnier@gmail.com> <49CFB33A.9020406@redhat.com> <20090330022521.GB13356@mit.edu> <49D03AE1.8070009@redhat.com> <1238413667.30488.2.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> <49D0C29C.1060307@uvigo.es> <20090330142518.GI13356@mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <20090330142518.GI13356@mit.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1129 Lines: 25 Theodore Tso wrote: > On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 10:01:16PM +0900, Fernando Luis V?zquez Cao wrote: >> Chris, I have just sent patches that attempt to fix both ext3 and >> ext4 while also adding a per-device sysfs knob tu disable >> write-flushes. A previous version of this patch set added a new >> generic mount option but comments from Christoph and others >> convinced me to turn it into a per-device tunable. Could you take >> a look at the patches? > > Fernando, see my comments on those patches. We don't need to issue a > barrier after a call to sync_inode() or ext[34]_force_commit(), since > those functions will issue a barrier for us. It would probably be a > good idea to use blktrace to test and make sure that we have one and > exactly one barrier op issued for each fsync(). I'll give blktrace a spin and check if things are working as expected. Thanks! - Fernando -- 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/