* [PATCH] buffer_insert_list should use list_add_tail
@ 2003-06-19 13:15 Chris Mason
2003-06-19 23:11 ` Nathan Scott
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Chris Mason @ 2003-06-19 13:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marcelo Tosatti; +Cc: linux-kernel
Hello all,
buffer_insert_list puts buffers onto the head of bh->b_inode_buffers,
which means that on fsync we are writing things out in reverse order. I
think we either want this patch, or we want to walk the list in reverse
in fsync_buffers_list
(this has not been well tested, but I can't think of any problems it
would cause)
-chris
--- linux.marcelo/fs/buffer.c Thu Jun 19 09:09:28 2003
+++ linux/fs/buffer.c Thu Jun 19 09:04:17 2003
@@ -591,7 +604,7 @@
if (buffer_attached(bh))
list_del(&bh->b_inode_buffers);
set_buffer_attached(bh);
- list_add(&bh->b_inode_buffers, list);
+ list_add_tail(&bh->b_inode_buffers, list);
spin_unlock(&lru_list_lock);
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] buffer_insert_list should use list_add_tail
2003-06-19 13:15 [PATCH] buffer_insert_list should use list_add_tail Chris Mason
@ 2003-06-19 23:11 ` Nathan Scott
2003-06-21 8:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Nathan Scott @ 2003-06-19 23:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Mason; +Cc: Marcelo Tosatti, hch, linux-kernel
On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 09:15:39AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> buffer_insert_list puts buffers onto the head of bh->b_inode_buffers,
> which means that on fsync we are writing things out in reverse order. I
> think we either want this patch, or we want to walk the list in reverse
> in fsync_buffers_list
>
> (this has not been well tested, but I can't think of any problems it
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> would cause)
hi Chris,
We noticed this too and Christoph made this change in the
2.4 XFS tree a little while ago - let me check dates - ah,
9th May. So, fair bit of testing here and we've not seen
any issues from this change either (we'd also like to see
it merged).
thanks.
>
> -chris
>
> --- linux.marcelo/fs/buffer.c Thu Jun 19 09:09:28 2003
> +++ linux/fs/buffer.c Thu Jun 19 09:04:17 2003
> @@ -591,7 +604,7 @@
> if (buffer_attached(bh))
> list_del(&bh->b_inode_buffers);
> set_buffer_attached(bh);
> - list_add(&bh->b_inode_buffers, list);
> + list_add_tail(&bh->b_inode_buffers, list);
> spin_unlock(&lru_list_lock);
> }
>
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
Nathan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] buffer_insert_list should use list_add_tail
2003-06-19 23:11 ` Nathan Scott
@ 2003-06-21 8:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2003-06-21 8:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nathan Scott; +Cc: Chris Mason, Marcelo Tosatti, linux-kernel
On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 09:11:17AM +1000, Nathan Scott wrote:
> hi Chris,
>
> We noticed this too and Christoph made this change in the
> 2.4 XFS tree a little while ago - let me check dates - ah,
> 9th May. So, fair bit of testing here and we've not seen
> any issues from this change either (we'd also like to see
> it merged).
It's already in 2.5 for a long time and -ac since the XFS merge, too/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-06-21 8:34 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-06-19 13:15 [PATCH] buffer_insert_list should use list_add_tail Chris Mason
2003-06-19 23:11 ` Nathan Scott
2003-06-21 8:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).