From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ted Ts'o Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ext4: Fix waiting and sending of a barrier in ext4_sync_file() Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 15:28:34 -0400 Message-ID: <20110523192834.GK10009@thunk.org> References: <20110522211239.GB10009@thunk.org> <1306098825-469-2-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <20110523171747.GG4716@quack.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Ext4 Developers List To: Jan Kara Return-path: Received: from li9-11.members.linode.com ([67.18.176.11]:33414 "EHLO test.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933531Ab1EWT2i (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 15:28:38 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110523171747.GG4716@quack.suse.cz> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 07:17:47PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > b) Whether we do or don't send the flush in > jbd2_journal_commit_transaction() depends on whether t_flushed_data_blocks > is set. We can't know in advance whether it gets set or not because it > depends on whether some inode is in transaction's t_inode_list and inodes > can get removed from there when flusher thread has written all the pages > and inode has been reclaimed. OTOH this looks like a bug in the commit code > anyway - I guess t_flushed_data_blocks (or better named equivalent) should > be set in jbd2_journal_file_inode(). Then such variable will also become > a reliable indicator whether the data flush is going to be sent or not. Um, I guess I don't see where an inode gets removed from t_inode_list after the writeback daemon is done with an inode? - Ted