From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] vfs: Make sync(1) writeout also block device inodes
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 05:44:23 -0400
Message-ID: <20110727094423.GA11334@infradead.org>
References: <1311719886-1130-1-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz>
 <1311719886-1130-2-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Curt Wohlgemuth <curtw@google.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from 173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([173.166.109.252]:39078
	"EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753574Ab1G0Jo0 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 27 Jul 2011 05:44:26 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1311719886-1130-2-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

> -static int __sync_filesystem(struct super_block *sb, int wait)
> +static void __sync_filesystem(struct super_block *sb, int wait)
>  {
> -	/*
> -	 * This should be safe, as we require bdi backing to actually
> -	 * write out data in the first place
> -	 */
> -	if (sb->s_bdi == &noop_backing_dev_info)
> -		return 0;
> -

Moving this check is not related to the block device writeback, is it?
Furthermore it gets moved deeper into the stack later on anyway, so it
gets reverted.

I think the series would be much cleaner if this patch gets moved
towards the end of it.

> +static void sync_all_bdevs(int wait)
> +{

This function should at least have a comment explaining why we need it.