From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Kara Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] writeback: get rid of generic_sync_sb_inodes() export Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 16:01:34 +0200 Message-ID: <20090902140134.GD17842@duck.novell.com> References: <1251880967-1136-1-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> <1251880967-1136-2-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> <20090902101333.GB17842@duck.novell.com> <20090902102626.GR12579@kernel.dk> 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, tytso@mit.edu, akpm@linux-foundation.org To: Jens Axboe Return-path: Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:49885 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752174AbZIBOBe (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Sep 2009 10:01:34 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090902102626.GR12579@kernel.dk> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed 02-09-09 12:26:26, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Wed, Sep 02 2009, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Wed 02-09-09 10:42:40, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > This adds two new exported functions: > > > > > > - sync_inodes_sb(), which writes out dirty inodes on a super_block, and > > > - sync_inodes_sb_wait(), which does the same but also waits for IO > > > completion. > > This is a nice cleanup. I only find the name sync_inodes_sb() slightly > > misleading and the comment by that function as well. The name should rather > > be something like writeback_inodes_sb() (and sync_inodes_sb_wait() could > > stay just sync_inodes_sb()) - the writeback it does does not really > > guarantee anything. For example it can skip inodes or pages it does not > > like for some reason. What that function really does is - try to write some > > dirty pages on that superblock and don't try too hard. > > I don't insist on the renaming of the function but I really thing the > > comment should be improved. > > I don't disagree, I was a bit torn on the naming as well. I will make > that change, thanks for the feedback! OK, thanks. > I'd really like your feedback on the pin_sb_for_writeback() stuff too, > since that is the contentious bit. And, this goes for others as well, > I'd appreciate any reviewed-by and/or acked-by on patches. I'll have a look at it probably tomorrow. Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR