From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] writeback: switch to per-bdi threads for flushing data Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 09:39:23 -0400 Message-ID: <20090316133923.GA27393@infradead.org> References: <1236868428-20408-1-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> <1236868428-20408-3-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> <20090316102253.GB9510@infradead.org> <1237210214.30224.3.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Jens Axboe , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, david@fromorbit.com, npiggin@suse.de, linux-mm@kvack.org To: Chris Mason Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:40310 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751966AbZCPNj3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Mar 2009 09:39:29 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1237210214.30224.3.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 09:30:14AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: > Some of our poor filesystem cousins don't write the super until kupdate > kicks them (see ext2_write_super). kupdate has always been the periodic > FS thread of last resort. Yikes, looks like this is indeed the only peridocial sb update for many simpler filesystems. We should really have a separate thread for that instead of hacking it into VM writeback. Especially with the per-bdi one where the current setup doesn't make any sense.