From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2 v4] Writeback livelock avoidance for data integrity writes Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 16:11:11 +1000 Message-ID: <20100618061111.GB6590@dastard> References: <1276706031-29421-1-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz> <20100616221541.GV6590@dastard> <20100617074350.GA3453@quack.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , npiggin@suse.de To: Jan Kara Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100617074350.GA3453@quack.suse.cz> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 09:43:50AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > On Thu 17-06-10 08:15:41, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 06:33:49PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > here is the fourth version of the writeback livelock avoidance patches > > > for data integrity writes. To quickly summarize the idea: we tag dirty > > > pages at the beginning of write_cache_pages with a new TOWRITE tag and > > > then write only tagged pages to avoid parallel writers to livelock us. > > > See changelogs of the patches for more details. > > > I have tested the patches with fsx and a test program I wrote which > > > checks that if we crash after fsync, the data is indeed on disk. > > > If there are no more concerns, can these patches get merged? > > > > Has it been run through xfstests? I'd suggest doing that at least > > with XFS as there are several significant sync sanity tests for XFS > > in the suite... > I've run it through XFSQA with ext3 & ext4 before submitting. I'm running > a test with xfs now. Cool. if there are no problems then I'm happy with this ;) Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org