All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Improve writeout pattern from xfs_flush_pages()
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 06:42:10 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110804104210.GA30823@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110804103616.GF17196@quack.suse.cz>

On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 12:36:16PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > The first one actually is a synchronous writeout, just implemented in
> > a rather odd way by doing the xfs_ioend_wait right after it, so your
> > change is actively harmful for it.
>   Oh, right. BTW cannot be truncate livelocked on a busy file because of
> that xfs_ioend_wait()?

Not really.  We requite the iolock for new writes to start, and truncate
holds it exclusively.  But I'm working on a series for 3.2 to remove
xfs_ioend_wait and just rely on inode_dio_wait for direct I/O, so it
will be gone soon.  At this point I'll also have to switch to
filemap_write_and_wait_range for this caller.

> > The third one is opportunistic writeout if a file got truncated down on
> > final release.  filemap_flush probably is fine here, but there's no need
> > for a range version.  If you replace it with filemap_flush please also
> > kill the useless wrapper while you're at it.
>   Do you mean xfs_flush_pages()? OK, I can do that.

Yes, xfs_flush_pages should go - at least he async version and its
abuse of the buffer flags.

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Improve writeout pattern from xfs_flush_pages()
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 06:42:10 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110804104210.GA30823@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110804103616.GF17196@quack.suse.cz>

On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 12:36:16PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > The first one actually is a synchronous writeout, just implemented in
> > a rather odd way by doing the xfs_ioend_wait right after it, so your
> > change is actively harmful for it.
>   Oh, right. BTW cannot be truncate livelocked on a busy file because of
> that xfs_ioend_wait()?

Not really.  We requite the iolock for new writes to start, and truncate
holds it exclusively.  But I'm working on a series for 3.2 to remove
xfs_ioend_wait and just rely on inode_dio_wait for direct I/O, so it
will be gone soon.  At this point I'll also have to switch to
filemap_write_and_wait_range for this caller.

> > The third one is opportunistic writeout if a file got truncated down on
> > final release.  filemap_flush probably is fine here, but there's no need
> > for a range version.  If you replace it with filemap_flush please also
> > kill the useless wrapper while you're at it.
>   Do you mean xfs_flush_pages()? OK, I can do that.

Yes, xfs_flush_pages should go - at least he async version and its
abuse of the buffer flags.


  reply	other threads:[~2011-08-04 10:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-08-03 20:49 [PATCH 0/2] Improve writeout pattern from xfs_flush_pages() Jan Kara
2011-08-03 20:49 ` Jan Kara
2011-08-03 20:49 ` [PATCH 1/2] vfs: Create filemap_flush_range() Jan Kara
2011-08-03 20:49   ` Jan Kara
2011-08-03 20:49 ` [PATCH 2/2] xfs: Call filemap_flush_range() for async xfs_flush_pages() call Jan Kara
2011-08-03 20:49   ` Jan Kara
2011-08-03 22:03   ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-08-03 22:03     ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-08-03 22:34   ` Vivek Goyal
2011-08-03 22:34     ` Vivek Goyal
2011-08-04 10:03     ` Jan Kara
2011-08-04 10:03       ` Jan Kara
2011-08-03 21:42 ` [PATCH 0/2] Improve writeout pattern from xfs_flush_pages() Christoph Hellwig
2011-08-03 21:42   ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-08-04 10:36   ` Jan Kara
2011-08-04 10:36     ` Jan Kara
2011-08-04 10:42     ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2011-08-04 10:42       ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-08-04 12:07       ` Jan Kara
2011-08-04 12:07         ` Jan Kara
2011-08-04 12:19         ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-08-04 12:19           ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-08-04 12:37           ` Jan Kara
2011-08-04 12:37             ` Jan Kara
2011-08-04 12:41             ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-08-04 12:41               ` Christoph Hellwig

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=20110804104210.GA30823@infradead.org \
    --to=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /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.