From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Fasheh Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2014 19:05:46 -0700 Subject: [Ocfs2-devel] [patch 4/8] ocfs2: call ocfs2_update_inode_fsync_trans when updating any inode In-Reply-To: <20140319211002.D199A5A4217@corp2gmr1-2.hot.corp.google.com> References: <20140319211002.D199A5A4217@corp2gmr1-2.hot.corp.google.com> Message-ID: <20140331020546.GD4488@wotan.suse.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 02:10:02PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > From: "Darrick J. Wong" > Subject: ocfs2: call ocfs2_update_inode_fsync_trans when updating any inode > > Ensure that ocfs2_update_inode_fsync_trans() is called any time we touch > an inode in a given transaction. This is a follow-on to the previous > patch to reduce lock contention and deadlocking during an fsync operation. This looks fine but I have a question - what happens if a future patch adds some disk structure change but forgets to call ocfs2_update_inode_fsync_trans(). Could we wind up skipping some blocks to sync in that case? --Mark -- Mark Fasheh