From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id o6CG1uuu037184 for ; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 11:01:56 -0500 Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 12:04:50 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: remove incorrect log write optimization Message-ID: <20100712160450.GA2666@infradead.org> References: <20100628143434.GA5473@infradead.org> <1278905400.7456.14.camel@doink> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1278905400.7456.14.camel@doink> 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: Alex Elder Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 10:30:00PM -0500, Alex Elder wrote: > On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 10:34 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > We do need a barrier for the first buffer of a split log write. Otherwise > > we might incorrectly stamp the tail LSN into transactions in the first > > block, or not flush data I/O before updating the inode size. > > I'm not sure whether "first block" means the one at the beginning > of the log, or the one at the beginning of a split log write. It means beginning of the split write. I can fix up the commit message if you want. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs