From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] writeback: sync expired inodes first in background writeback Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 16:36:59 +1000 Message-ID: <20110421063659.GH1814@dastard> References: <20110419073523.GF23985@dastard> <20110419095740.GC5257@quack.suse.cz> <20110419125616.GA20059@localhost> <20110420012120.GK23985@dastard> <20110420025321.GA14398@localhost> <20110421004547.GD1814@dastard> <20110421020617.GB12191@localhost> <20110421030152.GG1814@dastard> <20110421035954.GA15461@localhost> <20110421041010.GA18710@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jan Kara , Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , Mel Gorman , Trond Myklebust , Itaru Kitayama , Minchan Kim , LKML , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , Linux Memory Management List To: Wu Fengguang Return-path: Received: from ipmail06.adl6.internode.on.net ([150.101.137.145]:9581 "EHLO ipmail06.adl6.internode.on.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750704Ab1DUGhF (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Apr 2011 02:37:05 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110421041010.GA18710@localhost> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 12:10:11PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote: > > > Still, given wb_writeback() is the only caller of both > > > __writeback_inodes_sb and writeback_inodes_wb(), I'm wondering if > > > moving the queue_io calls up into wb_writeback() would clean up this > > > logic somewhat. I think Jan mentioned doing something like this as > > > well elsewhere in the thread... > > > > Unfortunately they call queue_io() inside the lock.. > > OK, let's try moving up the lock too. Do you like this change? :) Yes, very much ;) Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com