From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@nokia.com>
Cc: sct@redhat.com, adilger@sun.com, adrian.hunter@nokia.com,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, artem.bityutskiy@nokia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] HACK: ext3: mount fast even when recovering
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 14:34:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090714143449.cae624c8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090714140554.26116.54779.sendpatchset@ahunter-tower>
On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 17:05:54 +0300
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@nokia.com> wrote:
> Speed up ext3 recovery mount time by not sync'ing the
> block device. Instead place all dirty buffers into the
> I/O queue and add a write barrier. This ensures that
> no subsequent write will reach the disk before all the
> recovery writes, but that we do not have to wait for the
> I/O.
>
> Note that ext3 reads sectors the correct way: through the
> buffer cache, so there is no risk of reading old metadata.
hm. The change seems reasonable to me. afaict it leaves no timing
windows during which another crash could muck things up.
As long as those write barriers actually work. Do they? For all
conceivable devices and IO schedulers?
It would be useful if you could quantify the benefits please - some
before-and-after timing results with both your funky hardware as well
as regular old disks would suit.
I'd suggest that if we're going to do this, we should aim to do it
unconditionally - no mount option needed. We could leave the option
there for a while, for testing purposes (ie: we think the code might be
buggy). But the new feature should perhaps default to "on", and we
plan to remove the mount option after a while.
Because there's no reason to retain the mount option in the long term.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-14 21:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-14 14:05 [PATCH 0/2] ext3 HACKs Adrian Hunter
2009-07-14 14:05 ` [PATCH 1/2] HACK: ext3: mount fast even when recovering Adrian Hunter
2009-07-14 21:34 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-07-14 21:46 ` Eric Sandeen
2009-07-14 22:36 ` Theodore Tso
2009-07-15 15:35 ` Adrian Hunter
2009-07-15 5:53 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-07-15 15:35 ` Adrian Hunter
2009-07-14 14:06 ` [PATCH 2/2] HACK: do I/O read requests while ext3 journal recovers Adrian Hunter
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-07-14 14:02 [PATCH 0/2] ext3 HACKs Adrian Hunter
2009-07-14 14:03 ` [PATCH 1/2] HACK: ext3: mount fast even when recovering Adrian Hunter
2009-07-14 21:22 ` Andreas Dilger
2009-07-15 15:35 ` Adrian Hunter
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=20090714143449.cae624c8.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=adilger@sun.com \
--cc=adrian.hunter@nokia.com \
--cc=artem.bityutskiy@nokia.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sct@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).