Re: Test12 ll_rw_block error.

Marcelo Tosatti
2000-12-19T16:30:36Z

On Mon, 18 Dec 2000, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 12:38:17AM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 Dec 2000, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
> >
> > Stephen,
> >
> > The ->flush() operation (which we've been discussing a bit) would be very
> > useful now (mainly for XFS).
> >
> > At page_launder(), we can call ->flush() if the given page has it defined.
> > Otherwise use try_to_free_buffers() as we do now for filesystems which
> > dont care about the special flushing treatment.
>
> As of 2.4.0test12, page_launder() will already call the
> per-address-space writepage() operation for dirty pages. Do you need
> something similar for clean pages too, or does Linus's new laundry
> code give you what you need now?

I think the semantics of the filesystem specific ->flush and ->writepage
are not the same.

Is ok for filesystem specific writepage() code to sync other "physically
contiguous" dirty pages with reference to the one requested by
writepage() ?

If so, it can do the same job as the ->flush() idea we've discussing.