From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] writeback, xfs: call dirty_inode() with I_DIRTY_TIME_EXPIRED when appropriate
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 14:43:25 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200324184325.GF53396@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200324083759.GA32036@infradead.org>
On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 01:37:59AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 01:58:38PM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> > Christoph, Dave --- does this give you the notification that you were
> > looking such that XFS could get the notification desired that it was
> > the timestamps need to be written back?
>
> I need to look at it in more detail as it seems convoluted. Also the
> order seems like you regress XFS in patch 1 and then fix it in patch 2?
In patch one we send I_DIRTY_SYNC as we had been doing as before. So
I don't believe that patch #1 would regress XFS; can you confirm?
My thinking was to move ahead with patch 1 so that it fixed the bug
which Eric Biffers had reported for f2fs, but only to move forward
with patch #2 if it would be useful for XFS.
Cheers,
- Ted
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/2] writeback, xfs: call dirty_inode() with I_DIRTY_TIME_EXPIRED when appropriate
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 14:43:25 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200324184325.GF53396@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200324083759.GA32036@infradead.org>
On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 01:37:59AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 01:58:38PM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> > Christoph, Dave --- does this give you the notification that you were
> > looking such that XFS could get the notification desired that it was
> > the timestamps need to be written back?
>
> I need to look at it in more detail as it seems convoluted. Also the
> order seems like you regress XFS in patch 1 and then fix it in patch 2?
In patch one we send I_DIRTY_SYNC as we had been doing as before. So
I don't believe that patch #1 would regress XFS; can you confirm?
My thinking was to move ahead with patch 1 so that it fixed the bug
which Eric Biffers had reported for f2fs, but only to move forward
with patch #2 if it would be useful for XFS.
Cheers,
- Ted
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-24 18:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-06 0:45 lazytime causing inodes to remain dirty after sync? Eric Biggers
2020-03-06 0:45 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2020-03-07 2:00 ` [PATCH] writeback: avoid double-writing the inode on a lazytime expiration Theodore Ts'o
2020-03-07 2:00 ` [f2fs-dev] " Theodore Ts'o
2020-03-11 3:20 ` Eric Biggers
2020-03-11 3:20 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2020-03-11 12:57 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-11 12:57 ` [f2fs-dev] " Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-12 0:07 ` Dave Chinner
2020-03-12 0:07 ` [f2fs-dev] " Dave Chinner
2020-03-12 14:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-03-12 14:34 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2020-03-12 22:39 ` Dave Chinner
2020-03-12 22:39 ` [f2fs-dev] " Dave Chinner
2020-03-20 2:46 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-20 2:46 ` [f2fs-dev] " Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-20 2:52 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Theodore Ts'o
2020-03-20 2:52 ` [f2fs-dev] " Theodore Ts'o
2020-03-20 2:52 ` [PATCH 2/2] writeback, xfs: call dirty_inode() with I_DIRTY_TIME_EXPIRED when appropriate Theodore Ts'o
2020-03-20 2:52 ` [f2fs-dev] " Theodore Ts'o
2020-03-23 17:58 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-23 17:58 ` [f2fs-dev] " Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-24 8:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-03-24 8:37 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2020-03-24 18:43 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o [this message]
2020-03-24 18:43 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-25 9:20 ` [PATCH 1/2] writeback: avoid double-writing the inode on a lazytime expiration Christoph Hellwig
2020-03-25 9:20 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2020-03-25 15:21 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-25 15:21 ` [f2fs-dev] " Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-25 15:47 ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-03-25 15:47 ` [f2fs-dev] " Darrick J. Wong
2020-03-11 23:54 ` [PATCH] " Dave Chinner
2020-03-11 23:54 ` [f2fs-dev] " Dave Chinner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200324184325.GF53396@mit.edu \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.