From: Jan Kara Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix sending of a barrier and transaction waiting in ext4_sync_file() Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 12:51:49 +0200 Message-ID: <20110519105149.GC8417@quack.suse.cz> References: <1305628095-27843-1-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz> <20110518174327.GB20655@tux1.beaverton.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jan Kara , tytso@mit.edu, Edward Goggin , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: "Darrick J. Wong" Return-path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:37056 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754082Ab1ESKwM (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 May 2011 06:52:12 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110518174327.GB20655@tux1.beaverton.ibm.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed 18-05-11 10:43:27, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 12:28:13PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > > > Hi Ted, > > > > the two patches below fix ext4_sync_file() to wait for a transaction commit > > properly (return value of jbd2_log_start_commit() is not exactly what > > ext4_sync_file() thinks it is). It also optimizes / fixes sending of a barrier > > in some cases (e.g. in ordered mode with external journal we cannot really > > depend on transaction commit to issue a barrier to fs device because we don't > > seem to add inode to a transaction for overwrites). > > Probably a silly nit to pick, but do you mean "flush" instead of "barrier"? Oh, right. I mean flush :). Thanks. Honza > > I already fixed ext3 in this regard some time ago but didn't get to porting the > > patches to ext4. > > > > Honza > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html