From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756902AbZINTml (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:42:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756887AbZINTml (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:42:41 -0400 Received: from brick.kernel.dk ([93.163.65.50]:44050 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756882AbZINTmk (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:42:40 -0400 Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:42:43 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Jan Kara , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, chris.mason@oracle.com, tytso@mit.edu, akpm@linux-foundation.org, trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] writeback: separate starting of sync vs opportunistic writeback Message-ID: <20090914194242.GM14984@kernel.dk> References: <1252920994-11141-1-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> <1252920994-11141-7-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> <20090914133307.GJ24075@duck.suse.cz> <20090914134207.GA14830@infradead.org> <20090914192803.GL14984@kernel.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090914192803.GL14984@kernel.dk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 14 2009, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14 2009, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 03:33:07PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > > On Mon 14-09-09 11:36:33, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > > bdi_start_writeback() is currently split into two paths, one for > > > > WB_SYNC_NONE and one for WB_SYNC_ALL. Add bdi_sync_writeback() > > > > for WB_SYNC_ALL writeback and let bdi_start_writeback() handle > > > > only WB_SYNC_NONE. > > > What I don't like about this patch is that if somebody sets up > > > writeback_control with WB_SYNC_ALL mode set and then submits it to disk via > > > bdi_start_writeback() it will just silently convert his writeback to an > > > asynchronous one. > > > So I'd maybe leave setting of sync_mode to the caller and just WARN_ON if > > > it does not match the purpose of the function... > > > > Or initialize the wb entirely inside these functions. For the sync case > > we really only need a superblock as argument, and for writeback it's > > bdi + nr_pages. And also make sure they consistenly return void as > > no one cares about the return value. > > Yes, I thought about doing that and like that better than the warning. > Just pass in the needed args and allocate+fill the wbc on stack. I'll > make that change. That works out much better, imho: http://git.kernel.dk/?p=linux-2.6-block.git;a=commit;h=270c12655d7d11e234d335a8ab0540c02c034b66 -- Jens Axboe