public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@sgi.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com, jeremy@sgi.com
Subject: Re: review: fix remount vs barrier options
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 08:21:12 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060726082112.A2118045@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060725094438.GD29615@infradead.org>; from hch@infradead.org on Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 10:44:38AM +0100

Hi Christoph,

On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 10:44:38AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> ...
> The flag clearing changes look good.  But why is it okay to skip the
> ordered flag on the first block?  We want to make sure all previous I/O
> is finished before even doing the first log block write, don't we?

No, thats not necessary - Tim and I looked into this at length - the
way the split log write happens, we keep a count in the iclog struct
for this write (its initially 2); once the first write completes (and
this is guaranteed to be before the final write by the final write's
barrier), we atomically decrement that counter.  Once it reaches zero
(i.e. only one buffer completion was remaining, which is also the non-
split log write case) only then will we do any callback processing,
metadata unpinning, etc, etc.

So, its a safe and valid optimisation - otherwise we do an extra write
with barrier whenever we wrap around the physical log end.

Thanks for the reviews!

cheers.

-- 
Nathan

      reply	other threads:[~2006-07-25 22:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-07-21  5:28 review: fix remount vs barrier options Nathan Scott
2006-07-21  6:25 ` Timothy Shimmin
2006-07-23 19:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-07-24  0:01   ` Nathan Scott
2006-07-24  1:27     ` Nathan Scott
2006-07-25  9:44       ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-07-25 22:21         ` Nathan Scott [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=20060726082112.A2118045@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com \
    --to=nathans@sgi.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jeremy@sgi.com \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /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