From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [RFC] ext4: Don't send extra barrier during fsync if there are no dirty pages. Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 05:01:52 -0400 Message-ID: <20100803090152.GA6676@infradead.org> References: <20100429235102.GC15607@tux1.beaverton.ibm.com> <1272934667.2544.3.camel@mingming-laptop> <4BE02C45.6010608@redhat.com> <20100504154553.GA22777@infradead.org> <20100630124832.GA1333@thunk.org> <4C2B44C0.3090002@redhat.com> <20100630134429.GE1333@thunk.org> <20100721171609.GC1215@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20100803000939.GA2109@tux1.beaverton.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jan Kara , tytso@mit.edu, Ric Wheeler , Christoph Hellwig , Mingming Cao , linux-ext4 , linux-kernel , Keith Mannthey , Mingming Cao To: "Darrick J. Wong" Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:44193 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754189Ab0HCJB4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Aug 2010 05:01:56 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100803000939.GA2109@tux1.beaverton.ibm.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 05:09:39PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > Well... on my fsync-happy workloads, this seems to cut the barrier count down > by about 20%, and speeds it up by about 20%. Care to share the test case for this? I'd be especially interesting on how it behaves with non-draining barriers / cache flushes in fsync.