From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nathan Scott Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make BH_Unwritten a first class bufferhead flag Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 10:14:34 +1100 Message-ID: <1168298075.32113.62.camel@edge> References: <20070108224932.GZ33919298@melbourne.sgi.com> <20070108225402.GA24787@infradead.org> Reply-To: nscott@aconex.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Chinner , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mail.app.aconex.com ([203.89.192.138]:39730 "EHLO postoffice.aconex.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750729AbXAHXbE (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jan 2007 18:31:04 -0500 To: Christoph Hellwig In-Reply-To: <20070108225402.GA24787@infradead.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 22:54 +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > this doesn't look like a full first class flag to me yet. Don't > we need to check for buffer_unwritten in the places we're checking > for buffer_delay so we can stop setting buffer_delay for unwritten > buffers? Yep, that does need to be done. The first of the two calls to set_buffer_delay can be removed from __xfs_get_blocks also (currently there is an implied association between Delay and Unwritten, which should be removed now). I have a vague memory of some magic sysrq code (from 2.4 days) which counted BH state on a page - if that still exists it'd need to be updated too, but I can't seem to find it in current 2.6 kernels (used to live in buffer.c in ye olde 2.4 days). It probably left us around the time of PG_private's introduction. cheers. -- Nathan