Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754659AbZGANNA (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jul 2009 09:13:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751054AbZGANMw (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jul 2009 09:12:52 -0400 Received: from mail.digidescorp.com ([66.244.163.200]:24835 "EHLO digidescorp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750782AbZGANMv (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jul 2009 09:12:51 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 317 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2009 09:12:50 EDT X-Spam-Processed: digidescorp.com, Wed, 01 Jul 2009 08:07:35 -0500 X-Authenticated-Sender: steve@digidescorp.com X-Return-Path: prvs=1433facca9=steve@digidescorp.com X-Envelope-From: steve@digidescorp.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] FAT: optimize FSINFO writeback From: "Steven J. Magnani" Reply-To: steve@digidescorp.com To: OGAWA Hirofumi Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <873a9hfdqz.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> References: <1246392130-4261-1-git-send-email-steve@digidescorp.com> <87ocs5h238.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> <1246400345.2247.4.camel@iscandar.digidescorp.com> <873a9hfdqz.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Digital Design Corporation Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2009 08:07:03 -0500 Message-Id: <1246453623.2260.4.camel@iscandar.digidescorp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.2 (2.26.2-1.fc11) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1607 Lines: 42 On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 09:28 +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote: > "Steven J. Magnani" writes: > > >> Well, now, we are using sb->s_dirty for fsinfo, so I'm wondering why > >> this happen frequently. > > > > My scenario was modifying a sector of an existing file and using > > fdatasync() to flush it. The FSINFO sector was being updated even though > > nothing about the FAT layout had changed. > > I see. Probably, I'm missing something, or handling of sb->s_dirt may be > buggy, or something. > > If it was fixed, is this patch still needed? I guess this patch would > still be useful on some case though. If you can explain, it would be > good. It is I who am missing something. The patch originated against a 2.6.20 kernel, where it does indeed suppress unnecessary updates. I saw the same code in the 2.6.30 kernel and assumed the same issue was present, and tested that with the patch present there were no unnecessary updates. It appears that there are no unnecessary updates even _without_ the patch, so I withdraw it. > > Thanks. Thanks for looking at this so carefully. Regards, ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Steven J. Magnani "I claim this network for MARS! www.digidescorp.com Earthling, return my space modulator!" #include -- 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/