From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D21DC4CECE for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 01:58:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5DAE3217F9 for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 01:58:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="TIHUzyDc" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 5DAE3217F9 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46sdqw5tRgzDqxb for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 12:58:20 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::644; helo=mail-pl1-x644.google.com; envelope-from=kernelfans@gmail.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="TIHUzyDc"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-pl1-x644.google.com (mail-pl1-x644.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::644]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46sdnv4y9jzDqvr for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 12:56:33 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x644.google.com with SMTP id d22so8807227pls.0 for ; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 18:56:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Kwwu5kbmkBQ1HH+8pWXVXW0xmQfdqCxeByRCN8KSXEY=; b=TIHUzyDc6SGbORZPiz2reZIw7vN60Ixo8blMx0SNx6RBtQI/zstwu3hsCiWqL9JZQ6 IPThY2YzkQg8LrKB3cqxmkqsAs5VVvubIY28QgI45g0H0yaF5IzjbklpNV2+uzg7ULhD 41VHOncIQSJhMRT2o32TECBBQ+NfE0tIi1QkvfROvb7aKd+NouZWdTt5bs63H5tk7Ji2 lgJqac9vy5pPNqpqTuv8j8JQxXSpPEXx8cXPgJNtDNi+Fb3nWytmId8qoUaiqQJznwsD RzvUXAbBZYq4mAHTGUiGi8GCDb+XMcbtyT4TfXEdMoBGZjYFytyAH9oMmYLxg4F/HIz4 PdUw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Kwwu5kbmkBQ1HH+8pWXVXW0xmQfdqCxeByRCN8KSXEY=; b=dBTMg+2XRCaLYW+SoeKbH6y9b1YzD2PYO6Qt0H5GrfYVdfdgpv4OuWeMKqj8PaMZl+ UEb+ltOwOnscGYsNj1QJPRG7H5NObRtXAOsU6erY41jggJdvVCxy5cP3vbaIfSNFO1xm YS6suAo4D4Vay3Q/Hh0VW94e4194UM2VS4ZPeZE8bMHKB9Jah7FxghC7L7wbDUZ3oUb0 07jiOIZYluYhDlq1r4TiOixk1MLAhE9w57xaHdP3sCVdjycLm9mUpZ8TgXyDIR7Yhoel 2Mqtj6KNeY55BKV506glzOuF1kU2ESdSs9xP4pf4bJ+fyWFDUHnYNbHmwfIUx/TqM8/3 ZFTA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXu2jpsFqATMOikIKDiBfzC+/tvT77LTgfVIC06YG0hqAKrjmGP Zs95OuJF1gkDNkt3rfhzmw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw8OLndhpbDZgTRsz4NpKzRxTwytzyi9coZcCx6lgDY9wvvn1k4hzSKoy8pOwXWtzGMS7S1MA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:2e:: with SMTP id 43mr32776368pla.270.1571104590386; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 18:56:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mypc ([209.132.188.80]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b16sm24060901pfb.54.2019.10.14.18.56.27 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 14 Oct 2019 18:56:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 09:56:20 +0800 From: Pingfan Liu To: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: introduce "metasync" api to sync metadata to fsblock Message-ID: <20191015015620.GA14327@mypc> References: <1570977420-3944-1-git-send-email-kernelfans@gmail.com> <20191014084027.GA3593@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191014084027.GA3593@infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Eric Sandeen , "Darrick J. Wong" , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Dave Chinner , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Hari Bathini Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 01:40:27AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 10:37:00PM +0800, Pingfan Liu wrote: > > When using fadump (fireware assist dump) mode on powerpc, a mismatch > > between grub xfs driver and kernel xfs driver has been obsevered. Note: > > fadump boots up in the following sequence: fireware -> grub reads kernel > > and initramfs -> kernel boots. > > This isn't something new. To fundamentally fix this you need to > implement (in-memory) log recovery in grub. That is the only really safe > long-term solutioin. But the equivalent of your patch you can already Agree. For the consistency of the whole fs, we need grub to be aware of log. While this patch just assumes that files accessed by grub are known, and the consistency is forced only on these files. > get by freezing and unfreezing the file system using the FIFREEZE and > FITHAW ioctls. And if my memory is serving me correctly Dave has been freeze will block any further modification to the fs. That is different from my patch, which does not have such limitation. > preaching that to the bootloader folks for a long time, but apparently > without visible results. Yes, it is a pity. And maybe it is uneasy to do. Thanks and regards, Pingfan