linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@nokia.com>,
	sct@redhat.com, adilger@sun.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 16:46:37 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A5CFCBD.70305@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090714143449.cae624c8.akpm@linux-foundation.org>

Andrew Morton wrote:
> 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?

Good point .... for many devices the barriers will fail, but by then I
think this code has already moved on, right?  (And some devices will
lie, but at that point, oh well).

You could do a test barrier IO at the start, and keep the old behavior
if it fails, perhaps?

(whoa, can barriers make something faster?  who woulda thunk it)

-Eric

  reply	other threads:[~2009-07-14 21:47 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
2009-07-14 21:46     ` Eric Sandeen [this message]
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=4A5CFCBD.70305@redhat.com \
    --to=sandeen@redhat.com \
    --cc=adilger@sun.com \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@nokia.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --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).