Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] Assign bdi in super_block
From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, chris.mason@oracle.com,
       hch@infradead.org, tytso@mit.edu, akpm@linux-foundation.org
In-Reply-To: <20090915101457.GE12169@duck.suse.cz>
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>
	 <20090914183654.GJ14984@kernel.dk>  <20090915101457.GE12169@duck.suse.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 09:16:41 -0400
Message-Id: <1253020601.4456.1.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 899
Lines: 21

On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 12:14 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Mon 14-09-09 20:36:54, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > No, that should work fine. NFS already works fine with the bdi flusher
> > threads, so you should just point it at that bdi.
>   But will it really work well? I mean if we sync the superblock on the
> client, it will sync only the private BDI. So it won't sync any directory
> inodes because they are on the default_backing_dev_info (NFS leaves
> sb->s_bdev at NULL).

All directory related operations (link, rename, create, ...) are fully
synchronous in NFS. There should be no need to set up anything to
synchronise directory inodes.

Cheers
  Trond

--
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/