From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id o08ADknQ028683 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:13:49 -0600 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 11FB21C3B430 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 02:14:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [18.85.46.34]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 5M0rCwXsxpQAsq8y for ; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 02:14:39 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:14:37 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Kill async inode writeback V2 Message-ID: <20100108101437.GA19491@infradead.org> References: <1262649861-28530-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20100106180800.GA9613@infradead.org> <20100106224944.GW13802@discord.disaster> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100106224944.GW13802@discord.disaster> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 09:49:44AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 01:08:00PM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Btw, after this series XFS_IFLUSH_DELWRI_ELSE_SYNC is also unused, > > might be worth to throw something like the patch below in to clean > > up xfs_iflush: > > Yes, makes sense. I'll add the patch to my QA series after updating > it for the slight changes to the unmount reclaim I ahd in the > second posting of the patch. Can I get a signoff from you for this? Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig > > > I'm also not sure we do enough of the noblock calls either with or > > without your series. There seem to be a lot more non-blocking sync > > calls than iflush calls. > > I don't quite follow - inode flushes from the bdi threads should be > the majority of flushes (i.e. from xfs_fs_write_inode()) and they > are non-blocking. the xfssyncd does delwri writeback (maybe that > should be non-blocking and then we can get rid of that flag, too), > so the only sync inode writeback path is from xfs_fs_write_inode() > for sync flushing, as well as the unmount reclaim path.... Sorry, I mean non-blocking delwri calls above. xfs_sync_worker should certainly be non-blocking as the whole daemon is operating that way. And possibly xfs_sync_attr as well. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs