From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Kara Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] jbd: Provide function to check whether transaction will issue data barrier Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 22:48:31 +0200 Message-ID: <20100427204831.GD5103@quack.suse.cz> References: <1272312659-16468-1-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz> <1272312659-16468-2-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz> <87eii1d0hy.fsf@openvz.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jan Kara , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: Dmitry Monakhov Return-path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:38695 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754631Ab0D0Usb (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Apr 2010 16:48:31 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87eii1d0hy.fsf@openvz.org> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue 27-04-10 07:42:49, Dmitry Monakhov wrote: > Jan Kara writes: > > > Provide a function which returns whether a transaction with given tid > > will send a barrier to the filesystem device. The function will be used > > by ext3 to detect whether fsync needs to send a separate barrier or not. > Agree. Except the fact that in case of j_dev != j_fs_dev jbd is still > broken. Yeah, I know about this. I had a look at it but stumbled over a barrier issue in the checkpointing code (http://marc.info/?l=linux-ext4&m=127198235617788&w=2) so I though I'll wait till that gets resolved. > I'm plan to post back-port from jbd2 which makes > journal_trans_will_send_data_barrier() more complex. It have to analyze > commit_transaction->t_flushed_data_blocks. Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR