From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/15] writeback: remove writeback_control.more_io
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:06:26 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1107130804430.4820@sister.anvils>
References: <20110607213236.634026193@intel.com> <20110607213854.888623315@intel.com> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1107111408060.13830@sister.anvils> <20110712062013.GA4654@localhost> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1107121207540.1752@sister.anvils> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1107122234460.3608@sister.anvils>
 <alpine.LSU.2.00.1107130350570.4184@sister.anvils> <20110713111928.GA21787@quack.suse.cz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20110713111928.GA21787@quack.suse.cz>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 13 Jul 2011, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 13-07-11 03:57:40, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > 
> > I think we should assume that your -requeue_io +redirty_tail is a good
> > fix for the writeback freeze (if you can reassure us, that it does not
> > risk postponing some writes indefinitely)
>   Well, I_FREEING or I_WILL_FREE inodes are written back by iput_final()
> and it is reclaim code that is responsible for eventually removing them. So
> writeback code can safely ignore them. I_NEW inodes should move out of this
> state when they are fully set up and in the writeback round following that,
> we will consider them for writeback. So I think the change really makes
> sense.

That fits.  Good, thanks for the reassurance.

Hugh