Re: [rfc][patch] remove racy sync_page?

Nick Piggin
2006-05-30T06:45:05Z

Josef Sipek wrote:
> On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 07:34:09PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> ...
>
>>Can we get rid of the whole thing, confusing memory barriers and all?
>>Nobody uses anything but the default sync_page
>
>
> I feel like I must say this: there are some file systems that live
> outside the kernel (at least for now) that do _NOT_ use the default
> sync_page. All the stackable file systems that are based on FiST [1],
> such as Unionfs [2] and eCryptfs (currently in -mm) [3] (respective
> authors CC'd). As an example, Unionfs must decide which lower file
> system page to sync (since it may have several to chose from).

OK, noted. Thanks. Luckily for them it looks like sync_page might
stay for other reasons (eg. raid) ;)

Any good reasons they are not in the tree?

>
> Josef "Jeff" Sipek.
>
> [1] http://www.filesystems.org
> [2] http://unionfs.filesystems.org
> [3] http://ecryptfs.sourceforge.net

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com