From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Ray Lee <ray-lk@madrabbit.org>, Hua Zhong <hzhong@gmail.com>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 12:36:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090407103611.GA5910@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <10f740e80904070051u4ec81842u931a405ab5bde985@mail.gmail.com>
* Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 01:10, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >> thing that we think people would be happiest with.
> >>
> >> I think "ordered" was a reasonable default, but that was at least partly
> >> because _both_ ordered and writeback sucked (partly in different ways).
> >>
> >> I do think we could make it a config option.
> >
> > A patch _something_ like this.
> >
> > A few notes:
> >
> > - This is UNTESTED (of course)
> >
> > - If I did this right, this _only_ overrides the data mode if it's not
> > explicitly specified on disk in the superblock mount options.
> >
> > IOW, if you have done a
> >
> > tune2fs -o journal_data_ordered
> >
> > then this will _not_ override that. Only in the absense of any explicit
> > flags should this trigger and then make the choice be 'writeback'.
> >
> > And just to be _extra_ backwards compatible, if you really want the old
> > behavior, and don't want to set the ordering flag explicitly, just answer
> > 'y' to the EXT3_DEFAULTS_TO_ORDERED Kconfig question.
> >
> > What do people think? Anybody want to test?
> >
> > Linus
> >
> > ---
> > fs/ext3/Kconfig | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> > fs/ext3/super.c | 8 +++++++-
> > 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/ext3/Kconfig b/fs/ext3/Kconfig
> > index 8e0cfe4..fb3c1a2 100644
> > --- a/fs/ext3/Kconfig
> > +++ b/fs/ext3/Kconfig
> > @@ -28,6 +28,25 @@ config EXT3_FS
> > To compile this file system support as a module, choose M here: the
> > module will be called ext3.
> >
> > +config EXT3_DEFAULTS_TO_ORDERED
> > + bool "Default to 'data=ordered' in ext3 (legacy option)"
> > + depends on EXT3_FS
> > + help
> > + If a filesystem does not explicitly specify a data ordering
> > + mode, and the journal capability allowed it, ext3 used to
> > + historically default to 'data=ordered'.
> > +
> > + That was a rather unfortunate choice, because it leads to all
> > + kinds of latency problems, and the 'data=writeback' mode is more
> > + appropriate these days.
> > +
> > + You should probably always answer 'n' here, and if you really
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > + want to use 'data=ordered' mode, set it in the filesystem itself
> > + with 'tune2fs -o journal_data_ordered'.
> > +
> > + But if you really want to enable the legacy default, you can do
> > + so by answering 'y' to this question.
> > +
>
> So `allmodconfig' will enable it? Is that the right thing to do,
> or should it be inverted?
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
allmod/allyes will enable all sorts of legacy options.
Since besides myself i'm not aware of any other person on this
planet actually _booting_ allyes/allmod Linux kernels, i guess this
is not a big issue anyway :-)
One small detail only: i'd suggest to name it
CONFIG_COMPAT_EXT3_DEFAULTS_TO_ORDERED, to move it more in line with
all the CONFIG_COMPAT_* legacy options.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-07 10:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-06 12:48 [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 1/8] block: change the request allocation/congestion logic to be sync/async based Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 2/8] Add WRITE_SYNC_PLUG and SWRITE_SYNC_PLUG Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 3/8] block: fsync_buffers_list() should use SWRITE_SYNC_PLUG Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 4/8] jbd: use WRITE_SYNC_PLUG instead of WRITE_SYNC Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 5/8] jbd2: " Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 6/8] block: enabling plugging on SSD devices that don't do queuing Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 7/8] block: Add flag for telling the IO schedulers NOT to anticipate more IO Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 8/8] block: switch sync_dirty_buffer() over to WRITE_SYNC Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 13:04 ` [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 13:13 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 15:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 16:57 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-07 3:28 ` Chris Mason
2009-04-06 15:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 15:10 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 15:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 17:01 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 18:31 ` Theodore Tso
2009-04-06 19:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 20:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 21:26 ` Theodore Tso
2009-04-06 20:12 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 20:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 21:19 ` Theodore Tso
2009-04-06 21:35 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 22:04 ` Ray Lee
2009-04-06 22:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 23:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 7:51 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2009-04-07 10:36 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-04-07 14:10 ` Diego Calleja
2009-04-08 12:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-08 12:56 ` Denys Vlasenko
2009-04-08 13:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-07 13:35 ` Mark Lord
2009-04-07 14:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 19:24 ` Mark Lord
2009-04-07 19:45 ` Jeff Garzik
2009-04-07 20:53 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-04-09 2:40 ` Eric Sandeen
2009-04-09 14:01 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-04-06 22:25 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 22:48 ` Ray Lee
2009-04-06 22:52 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 23:19 ` Alan Cox
2009-04-07 3:52 ` Chris Mason
2009-04-07 4:13 ` Trenton D. Adams
2009-04-07 4:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 4:48 ` Trenton D. Adams
2009-04-07 5:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 5:23 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-07 6:27 ` Trenton D. Adams
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090407103611.GA5910@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=hzhong@gmail.com \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ray-lk@madrabbit.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.