From: Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
jack@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: push i_mutex and filemap_write_and_wait down into ->fsync() handlers
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 14:14:46 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E0B6B96.7020606@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110629180939.GA9934@infradead.org>
On 06/29/2011 02:09 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> -int blkdev_fsync(struct file *filp, int datasync)
>> +int blkdev_fsync(struct file *filp, loff_t start, loff_t end, int datasync)
>> {
>> struct inode *bd_inode = filp->f_mapping->host;
>> struct block_device *bdev = I_BDEV(bd_inode);
>> @@ -389,14 +389,10 @@ int blkdev_fsync(struct file *filp, int datasync)
>> * i_mutex and doing so causes performance issues with concurrent
>> * O_SYNC writers to a block device.
>> */
>> - mutex_unlock(&bd_inode->i_mutex);
>> -
>
> Now that i_mutex on entry isn't held the comment above can be removed.
>
The comment is still useful since it states why we don't take the
i_mutex at all, so I think it's still valuable. Thanks,
Josef
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-29 18:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-29 18:05 [PATCH] fs: push i_mutex and filemap_write_and_wait down into ->fsync() handlers Josef Bacik
2011-06-29 18:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-29 18:14 ` Josef Bacik [this message]
2011-06-29 19:26 ` Jan Kara
2011-07-23 18:09 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-23 18:09 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-23 19:32 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-23 19:32 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-23 20:26 ` Josef Bacik
2011-07-23 20:26 ` Josef Bacik
2011-07-23 20:38 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-23 20:38 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-23 22:02 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-23 22:02 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-24 11:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-24 11:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-24 11:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-24 11:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-24 11:54 ` [PATCH] xfs: Fix wrong return value of xfs_file_aio_write Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-24 11:54 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-24 11:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-24 11:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-24 11:58 ` [PATCH v2] " Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-24 11:58 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-24 12:03 ` [PATCH] " Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-24 12:03 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-24 12:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-24 12:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-26 15:21 ` Alex Elder
2011-07-26 15:21 ` Alex Elder
2011-07-25 17:38 ` [PATCH] fs: push i_mutex and filemap_write_and_wait down into ->fsync() handlers Ted Ts'o
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-06-28 15:35 Josef Bacik
2011-06-29 16:38 ` Jan Kara
2011-06-29 17:41 ` Josef Bacik
2011-06-29 17:05 ` richard -rw- weinberger
2011-06-29 17:05 ` richard -rw- weinberger
2011-07-04 8:54 ` Steven Whitehouse
2011-07-19 10:24 ` Dave Chinner
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=4E0B6B96.7020606@redhat.com \
--to=josef@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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.