From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Curt Wohlgemuth <curtw@google.com>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] writeback: Don't wait for completion in writeback_inodes_sb_nr
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 02:42:11 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110629064210.GA18469@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110629005422.GQ32466@dastard>
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 10:54:22AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> The comment says it does not wait for IO to be -completed-.
>
> The function as implemented waits for IO to be *submitted*.
>
> This provides the callers with same blocking semantics (i.e. request
> queue full) as if the caller submitted the IO themselves. The code
> that uses this function rely on this blocking to delay the next set
> of operations they do until after IO has been started, so removing
> the completion will change their behaviour significantly.
The real importance is for locking. If we don't wait for completion
we may still do writebacks in the flushers thread while we're already
unlocked s_umount. That will give us back the nasty writeback vs
umount races that this scheme fixed. The commit logs that added
it should explain it in more detail (at least I usually write detailed
changelogs)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-29 6:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-28 23:43 [PATCH] writeback: Don't wait for completion in writeback_inodes_sb_nr Curt Wohlgemuth
2011-06-29 0:54 ` Dave Chinner
2011-06-29 1:56 ` Curt Wohlgemuth
2011-06-29 8:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-29 16:57 ` Jan Kara
2011-06-29 17:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-29 19:15 ` Jan Kara
2011-06-29 20:12 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-30 12:15 ` Jan Kara
2011-06-30 12:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-01 22:55 ` Curt Wohlgemuth
2011-07-02 11:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-11 17:00 ` Jan Kara
2011-07-11 17:11 ` Curt Wohlgemuth
2011-07-11 19:48 ` Jan Kara
2011-07-11 19:51 ` Curt Wohlgemuth
2011-07-11 20:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-12 10:34 ` Jan Kara
2011-07-12 10:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-12 22:37 ` Jan Kara
2011-07-14 16:29 ` Curt Wohlgemuth
2011-07-14 23:08 ` Jan Kara
2011-07-19 16:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-21 18:35 ` Jan Kara
2011-07-22 15:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-19 16:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-19 16:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-20 22:00 ` Jan Kara
2011-07-22 15:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-29 17:26 ` Curt Wohlgemuth
2011-06-29 18:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-29 21:30 ` Curt Wohlgemuth
2011-07-19 15:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-29 6:42 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110629064210.GA18469@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=curtw@google.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).