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 08:41:18 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110804124118.GA6352@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110804123722.GB20800@quack.suse.cz>

On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 02:37:22PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > from Dave - before that it was asynchronous and in weird context, so
> > it seems we defintively need it to be synchronous.
>   From the changelog it seems it needs to be synchronous in the sense that
> we don't offload flushing to a different thread as we used to. Also the
> reason why previously flushing didn't work was that we held page locks and
> IO lock but it's not the case in xfs_file_buffered_aio_write() anymore. So
> filemap_flush() still looks like an appropriate thing to me.
> 
> > I agree that just flushing this inode seems like a rather odd handling
> > for ENOSPC.  It's even more odd as we already use the big hammer before
> > in when we git ENOSPC in ->write_begin.  The only thing I can imagine is
> > that this is the last attempt to get anything freed.
>   OK, I'll leave it there then. I just wonder whether I should convert it
> to filemap_flush() or to filemap_write_and_wait()...

My preference would be to not touch it unless we have a good reason.

_______________________________________________
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 08:41:18 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110804124118.GA6352@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110804123722.GB20800@quack.suse.cz>

On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 02:37:22PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > from Dave - before that it was asynchronous and in weird context, so
> > it seems we defintively need it to be synchronous.
>   From the changelog it seems it needs to be synchronous in the sense that
> we don't offload flushing to a different thread as we used to. Also the
> reason why previously flushing didn't work was that we held page locks and
> IO lock but it's not the case in xfs_file_buffered_aio_write() anymore. So
> filemap_flush() still looks like an appropriate thing to me.
> 
> > I agree that just flushing this inode seems like a rather odd handling
> > for ENOSPC.  It's even more odd as we already use the big hammer before
> > in when we git ENOSPC in ->write_begin.  The only thing I can imagine is
> > that this is the last attempt to get anything freed.
>   OK, I'll leave it there then. I just wonder whether I should convert it
> to filemap_flush() or to filemap_write_and_wait()...

My preference would be to not touch it unless we have a good reason.


  reply	other threads:[~2011-08-04 12:41 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
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 [this message]
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=20110804124118.GA6352@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.