Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754530Ab1CYQaw (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:30:52 -0400 Received: from mail-qy0-f181.google.com ([209.85.216.181]:42931 "EHLO mail-qy0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754107Ab1CYQau (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:30:50 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=f8gWYQACv556Gwpr9QW1YOzBLWyB5xcLFl0GOyaZNeDMweQ+aec1NjariQNebF3OM7 RbFymiQF4WA+dVh5PTcWGK2TWlPwxutOvcNqaWx9k+KXusLP/2Fzr/l/d9Frq7Mp1hoj 1zhiYFw+AkWR5M/EPPbVbui8a5iymL2JsQ2es= MIME-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: sedat.dilek@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <20110325144544.GF1409@htj.dyndns.org> References: <20110325125643.91510e0e.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20110325144544.GF1409@htj.dyndns.org> Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 17:30:49 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ext4 tree with Linus' tree From: Sedat Dilek To: Tejun Heo Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Theodore Tso , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mingming Cao Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2294 Lines: 62 On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, Stephen, Ted. > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:56:43PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Today's linux-next merge of the ext4 tree got a conflict in >> fs/ext4/super.c between commit fd89d5f2030a ("ext4: convert to >> alloc_workqueue()") from Linus' tree and commit 198868f35de9 ("ext4: Use >> single thread to perform DIO unwritten convertion") from the ext4 tree. >> >> I just used the ext4 tree version. > > Both are about the same conversion but the one using alloc_workqueue() > is better because 1. create_singlethread_workqueue() is going away and > 2. it doesn't require strict ordering among queued works. > > Ted, what do you think? > > Thanks. > > -- > tejun > As my linux-next system is unstable, I had a look into my own merge (into linux-next GIT) before ext4 stuff went to mainline. Just wanted to test a revert to "old" code in linux-next (see below). - Sedat - --- a/fs/ext4/super.c +++ b/fs/ext4/super.c @@ -596,7 +596,7 @@ __acquires(bitlock) vaf.fmt = fmt; vaf.va = &args; - printk(KERN_CRIT "EXT4-fs error (device %s): %s:%d: group %u", + printk(KERN_CRIT "EXT4-fs error (device %s): %s:%d: group %u, ", sb->s_id, function, line, grp); if (ino) printk(KERN_CONT "inode %lu: ", ino); @@ -3518,12 +3518,7 @@ static int ext4_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, void *data, int silent) percpu_counter_set(&sbi->s_dirtyblocks_counter, 0); no_journal: - /* - * The maximum number of concurrent works can be high and - * concurrency isn't really necessary. Limit it to 1. - */ - EXT4_SB(sb)->dio_unwritten_wq = - alloc_workqueue("ext4-dio-unwritten", WQ_MEM_RECLAIM, 1); + EXT4_SB(sb)->dio_unwritten_wq = create_singlethread_workqueue("ext4-dio-unwritten"); if (!EXT4_SB(sb)->dio_unwritten_wq) { printk(KERN_ERR "EXT4-fs: failed to create DIO workqueue\n"); goto failed_mount_wq; - EOT - -- 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/