From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] writeback: move dirty inodes from super_block to backing_dev_info Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 17:35:05 -0400 Message-ID: <20090806213505.GB20538@infradead.org> References: <1248989044-21605-1-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> <1248989044-21605-2-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, chris.mason@oracle.com, david@fromorbit.com, hch@infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, jack@suse.cz, yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com, richard@rsk.demon.co.uk, damien.wyart@free.fr, fweisbec@gmail.com, Alan.Brunelle@hp.com To: Jens Axboe Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:44967 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756084AbZHFVfE (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Aug 2009 17:35:04 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1248989044-21605-2-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:23:56PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > This is a first step at introducing per-bdi flusher threads. We should > have no change in behaviour, although sb_has_dirty_inodes() is now > ridiculously expensive, as there's no easy way to answer that question. > Not a huge problem, since it'll be deleted in subsequent patches. Looking at this again and again I don't really like this at all. What is the problem with having per-bdi flushing threads that just iterate a list of superblocks per-bdi and then the inodes from there? That would keep a lot of the calling conventions much more logical, as we have to writeback data per-sb for all data integrity and some other writes.