Re: [PATCH] buffer_insert_list should use list_add_tail

[Nathan Scott <nathans@sgi.com>]

On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 09:15:39AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> buffer_insert_list puts buffers onto the head of bh->b_inode_buffers,
> which means that on fsync we are writing things out in reverse order.  I
> think we either want this patch, or we want to walk the list in reverse
> in fsync_buffers_list
> 
> (this has not been well tested, but I can't think of any problems it
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> would cause)


hi Chris,

We noticed this too and Christoph made this change in the
2.4 XFS tree a little while ago - let me check dates - ah,
9th May.  So, fair bit of testing here and we've not seen
any issues from this change either (we'd also like to see
it merged).

thanks.


> 
> -chris
> 
> --- linux.marcelo/fs/buffer.c	Thu Jun 19 09:09:28 2003
> +++ linux/fs/buffer.c	Thu Jun 19 09:04:17 2003
> @@ -591,7 +604,7 @@
>  	if (buffer_attached(bh))
>  		list_del(&bh->b_inode_buffers);
>  	set_buffer_attached(bh);
> -	list_add(&bh->b_inode_buffers, list);
> +	list_add_tail(&bh->b_inode_buffers, list);
>  	spin_unlock(&lru_list_lock);
>  }
>  
> 
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

-- 
Nathan