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 pBIMWf3x255605 for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2011 16:32:42 -0600 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.166.109.252]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id AcHNVWc8klF3DGjZ for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2011 14:32:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 17:32:39 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfs: log all dirty inodes in xfs_fs_sync_fs Message-ID: <20111218223239.GA10435@infradead.org> References: <20111218154936.GA17626@infradead.org> <20111218155015.GC17626@infradead.org> <20111218221707.GH23662@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111218221707.GH23662@dastard> 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 , Paul Anderson , Sean Thomas Caron , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 09:17:07AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > This will do a transaction on the inode, clean or dirty. That's an > awful lot of overhead for the few inodes (out of perhaps millions in > memory) that actually need it. with the ->dirty_inode callback from > the VFS, we know the only inodes that need logging are those with > i_update_core set.... Ooops, I messed that up when forwarding the RFC patch I sent to Paul & Sean, and that I had been testing with most of the time. The original one moved the i_update_core check into xfs_log_inode and that is how it should be done. I'll resend it. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs