From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: exofs_file_fsync Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 12:33:49 +0200 Message-ID: <20100531103349.GA12196@lst.de> References: <20100531100927.GA11149@lst.de> <4C038E0D.3010400@panasas.com> <20100531102706.GA11961@lst.de> <4C038FE5.8000504@panasas.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Boaz Harrosh Return-path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.210]:50382 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751437Ab0EaKdy (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 May 2010 06:33:54 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C038FE5.8000504@panasas.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 01:31:01PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > OK, I was just looking at that. thanks you saved me some digging. > should I just open-code the generic_file_fsync minus the blocks > thing then? sync_mapping_buffers is a no-op for you so you can keep it. The other difference is that you sync out the superblock at the end of your fsync implementation. That is rather unusual, but I don't know enough about exofs if you really need to update data in the superblock to commit file data to disk. > I'm busy with the truncate stuff, but I'll do this next. > Do you need this ASAP? I just noticed it while walking through the fsync implementations.