From: Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
jack@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: push i_mutex and filemap_write_and_wait down into ->fsync() handlers
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 14:14:46 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E0B6B96.7020606@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110629180939.GA9934@infradead.org>
On 06/29/2011 02:09 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> -int blkdev_fsync(struct file *filp, int datasync)
>> +int blkdev_fsync(struct file *filp, loff_t start, loff_t end, int datasync)
>> {
>> struct inode *bd_inode = filp->f_mapping->host;
>> struct block_device *bdev = I_BDEV(bd_inode);
>> @@ -389,14 +389,10 @@ int blkdev_fsync(struct file *filp, int datasync)
>> * i_mutex and doing so causes performance issues with concurrent
>> * O_SYNC writers to a block device.
>> */
>> - mutex_unlock(&bd_inode->i_mutex);
>> -
>
> Now that i_mutex on entry isn't held the comment above can be removed.
>
The comment is still useful since it states why we don't take the
i_mutex at all, so I think it's still valuable. Thanks,
Josef
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-29 18:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-29 18:05 [PATCH] fs: push i_mutex and filemap_write_and_wait down into ->fsync() handlers Josef Bacik
2011-06-29 18:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-29 18:14 ` Josef Bacik [this message]
2011-06-29 19:26 ` Jan Kara
2011-07-23 18:09 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-23 19:32 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-23 20:26 ` Josef Bacik
2011-07-23 20:38 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-23 22:02 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-24 11:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-24 11:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-24 11:54 ` [PATCH] xfs: Fix wrong return value of xfs_file_aio_write Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-24 11:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-24 11:58 ` [PATCH v2] " Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-24 12:03 ` [PATCH] " Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-07-24 12:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-26 15:21 ` Alex Elder
2011-07-25 17:38 ` [PATCH] fs: push i_mutex and filemap_write_and_wait down into ->fsync() handlers Ted Ts'o
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-06-28 15:35 Josef Bacik
2011-06-29 16:38 ` Jan Kara
2011-06-29 17:41 ` Josef Bacik
2011-06-29 17:05 ` richard -rw- weinberger
2011-07-04 8:54 ` Steven Whitehouse
2011-07-19 10:24 ` Dave Chinner
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=4E0B6B96.7020606@redhat.com \
--to=josef@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--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).