From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:57430 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750763AbeERP4g (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 May 2018 11:56:36 -0400 Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 08:56:36 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Jeff Layton Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, willy@infradead.org, andres@anarazel.de Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 01/11] vfs: push __sync_blockdev calls down into sync_fs routines Message-ID: <20180518155636.GB16931@infradead.org> References: <20180518123415.28181-1-jlayton@kernel.org> <20180518123415.28181-2-jlayton@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180518123415.28181-2-jlayton@kernel.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c > @@ -1097,7 +1097,7 @@ xfs_fs_sync_fs( > * Doing anything during the async pass would be counterproductive. > */ > if (!wait) > - return 0; > + goto out; > > xfs_log_force(mp, XFS_LOG_SYNC); > if (laptop_mode) { > @@ -1108,8 +1108,8 @@ xfs_fs_sync_fs( > */ > flush_delayed_work(&mp->m_log->l_work); > } > - > - return 0; > +out: > + return __sync_blockdev(sb->s_bdev, wait); XFS never uses the block device mapping for anything, so this is not needed. > +/* > + * Many legacy filesystems don't have a sync_fs op. For them, we just flush > + * the block device (if there is one). > + */ > +static inline int call_sync_fs(struct super_block *sb, int wait) > +{ > + if (sb->s_op->sync_fs) > + return sb->s_op->sync_fs(sb, wait); > + return __sync_blockdev(sb->s_bdev, wait); > +} The proper name for this would be vfs_sync_fs. And I don't think it warrants an inline.