Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933487AbZINSgy (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Sep 2009 14:36:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933476AbZINSgw (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Sep 2009 14:36:52 -0400 Received: from brick.kernel.dk ([93.163.65.50]:55533 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933475AbZINSgv (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Sep 2009 14:36:51 -0400 Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:36:54 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Trond Myklebust Cc: Jan Kara , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, chris.mason@oracle.com, hch@infradead.org, tytso@mit.edu, akpm@linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] Assign bdi in super_block Message-ID: <20090914183654.GJ14984@kernel.dk> References: <1252920994-11141-1-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> <1252920994-11141-3-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> <20090914130228.GG24075@duck.suse.cz> <1252952724.6866.62.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1252952724.6866.62.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1940 Lines: 42 On Mon, Sep 14 2009, Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 15:02 +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Mon 14-09-09 11:36:29, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > We do this automatically in get_sb_bdev() from the set_bdev_super() > > > callback. Filesystems that have their own private backing_dev_info > > > must assign that in ->fill_super(). > > > > > > Note that ->s_bdi assignment is required for proper writeback! > > > > > > Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig > > > Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe > > Hmm, looking at this again, I'm not sure this will work for NFS. It seems > > to set mapping->backing_dev_info to its private backing dev info for > > regular files while it leaves it intact for other inodes (e.g. > > directories). I'm not sure why it does so but it seems its inodes end up on > > two different BDI lists and thus they wouldn't be synced properly. Trond, > > do I read the code properly? > > Also we definitely need to set *some* bdi in nfs_get_sb as otherwise sync > > won't work for it. > > There hasn't really been a need for a bdi in NFS other than for the > regular file read and writeback code. The main reason for making it > private was to ensure that we could set a per-superblock readahead limit > that was a decent multiple of the server's preferred read block size. > > Is there any reason why we couldn't set sb->s_bdi to point to that > private bdi? No, that should work fine. NFS already works fine with the bdi flusher threads, so you should just point it at that bdi. If you could take a look at the parent patch and give some input (or an addition for NFS, even better), then I would much appreciate it. -- Jens Axboe -- 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/