From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Ray Lee <ray-lk@madrabbit.org>, Hua Zhong <hzhong@gmail.com>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 12:36:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090407103611.GA5910@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <10f740e80904070051u4ec81842u931a405ab5bde985@mail.gmail.com>
* Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 01:10, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >> thing that we think people would be happiest with.
> >>
> >> I think "ordered" was a reasonable default, but that was at least partly
> >> because _both_ ordered and writeback sucked (partly in different ways).
> >>
> >> I do think we could make it a config option.
> >
> > A patch _something_ like this.
> >
> > A few notes:
> >
> > - This is UNTESTED (of course)
> >
> > - If I did this right, this _only_ overrides the data mode if it's not
> > explicitly specified on disk in the superblock mount options.
> >
> > IOW, if you have done a
> >
> > tune2fs -o journal_data_ordered
> >
> > then this will _not_ override that. Only in the absense of any explicit
> > flags should this trigger and then make the choice be 'writeback'.
> >
> > And just to be _extra_ backwards compatible, if you really want the old
> > behavior, and don't want to set the ordering flag explicitly, just answer
> > 'y' to the EXT3_DEFAULTS_TO_ORDERED Kconfig question.
> >
> > What do people think? Anybody want to test?
> >
> > Linus
> >
> > ---
> > fs/ext3/Kconfig | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> > fs/ext3/super.c | 8 +++++++-
> > 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/ext3/Kconfig b/fs/ext3/Kconfig
> > index 8e0cfe4..fb3c1a2 100644
> > --- a/fs/ext3/Kconfig
> > +++ b/fs/ext3/Kconfig
> > @@ -28,6 +28,25 @@ config EXT3_FS
> > To compile this file system support as a module, choose M here: the
> > module will be called ext3.
> >
> > +config EXT3_DEFAULTS_TO_ORDERED
> > + bool "Default to 'data=ordered' in ext3 (legacy option)"
> > + depends on EXT3_FS
> > + help
> > + If a filesystem does not explicitly specify a data ordering
> > + mode, and the journal capability allowed it, ext3 used to
> > + historically default to 'data=ordered'.
> > +
> > + That was a rather unfortunate choice, because it leads to all
> > + kinds of latency problems, and the 'data=writeback' mode is more
> > + appropriate these days.
> > +
> > + You should probably always answer 'n' here, and if you really
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > + want to use 'data=ordered' mode, set it in the filesystem itself
> > + with 'tune2fs -o journal_data_ordered'.
> > +
> > + But if you really want to enable the legacy default, you can do
> > + so by answering 'y' to this question.
> > +
>
> So `allmodconfig' will enable it? Is that the right thing to do,
> or should it be inverted?
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
allmod/allyes will enable all sorts of legacy options.
Since besides myself i'm not aware of any other person on this
planet actually _booting_ allyes/allmod Linux kernels, i guess this
is not a big issue anyway :-)
One small detail only: i'd suggest to name it
CONFIG_COMPAT_EXT3_DEFAULTS_TO_ORDERED, to move it more in line with
all the CONFIG_COMPAT_* legacy options.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-07 10:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-06 12:48 [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 1/8] block: change the request allocation/congestion logic to be sync/async based Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 2/8] Add WRITE_SYNC_PLUG and SWRITE_SYNC_PLUG Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 3/8] block: fsync_buffers_list() should use SWRITE_SYNC_PLUG Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 4/8] jbd: use WRITE_SYNC_PLUG instead of WRITE_SYNC Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 5/8] jbd2: " Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 6/8] block: enabling plugging on SSD devices that don't do queuing Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 7/8] block: Add flag for telling the IO schedulers NOT to anticipate more IO Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 8/8] block: switch sync_dirty_buffer() over to WRITE_SYNC Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 13:04 ` [PATCH 0/8][RFC] IO latency/throughput fixes Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 13:13 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 15:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 16:57 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-07 3:28 ` Chris Mason
2009-04-06 15:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 15:10 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 15:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 17:01 ` Jens Axboe
2009-04-06 18:31 ` Theodore Tso
2009-04-06 19:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 20:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 21:26 ` Theodore Tso
2009-04-06 20:12 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 20:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 21:19 ` Theodore Tso
2009-04-06 21:35 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 22:04 ` Ray Lee
2009-04-06 22:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-06 23:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 7:51 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2009-04-07 10:36 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-04-07 14:10 ` Diego Calleja
2009-04-08 12:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-08 12:56 ` Denys Vlasenko
2009-04-08 13:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-07 13:35 ` Mark Lord
2009-04-07 14:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 19:24 ` Mark Lord
2009-04-07 19:45 ` Jeff Garzik
2009-04-07 20:53 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-04-09 2:40 ` Eric Sandeen
2009-04-09 14:01 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-04-06 22:25 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 22:48 ` Ray Lee
2009-04-06 22:52 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-06 23:19 ` Alan Cox
2009-04-07 3:52 ` Chris Mason
2009-04-07 4:13 ` Trenton D. Adams
2009-04-07 4:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 4:48 ` Trenton D. Adams
2009-04-07 5:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-07 5:23 ` Hua Zhong
2009-04-07 6:27 ` Trenton D. Adams
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090407103611.GA5910@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=hzhong@gmail.com \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ray-lk@madrabbit.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox