Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 11:30:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 11:30:27 -0500 Received: from perninha.conectiva.com.br ([200.250.58.156]:42762 "EHLO perninha.conectiva.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 11:30:11 -0500 Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 12:05:15 -0200 (BRST) From: Marcelo Tosatti To: "Stephen C. Tweedie" cc: Alexander Viro , Linus Torvalds , Russell Cattelan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Test12 ll_rw_block error. In-Reply-To: <20001218114612.E21351@redhat.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 18 Dec 2000, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 12:38:17AM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > On Fri, 15 Dec 2000, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote: > > > > Stephen, > > > > The ->flush() operation (which we've been discussing a bit) would be very > > useful now (mainly for XFS). > > > > At page_launder(), we can call ->flush() if the given page has it defined. > > Otherwise use try_to_free_buffers() as we do now for filesystems which > > dont care about the special flushing treatment. > > As of 2.4.0test12, page_launder() will already call the > per-address-space writepage() operation for dirty pages. Do you need > something similar for clean pages too, or does Linus's new laundry > code give you what you need now? I think the semantics of the filesystem specific ->flush and ->writepage are not the same. Is ok for filesystem specific writepage() code to sync other "physically contiguous" dirty pages with reference to the one requested by writepage() ? If so, it can do the same job as the ->flush() idea we've discussing. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/