Re: [PATCH 2/9] ext4: honor the O_SYNC flag for aysnchronousdirect I/O requests

[Jan Kara]

On Wed 21-11-12 09:09:41, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> >> Just to be clear, are you saying you would like me to remove the
> >> mutex_lock/unlock pair from ext4_sync_file?  (I had already factored out
> >> the common code between this new code path and the fsync path in my tree.)
> >   Yes, after some thinking I came to that conclusion. We actually need to
> > keep i_mutex around ext4_flush_unwritten_io() to avoid livelocks but the
> > rest doesn't need it. The change should be definitely a separate patch just
> > in case there's something subtle I missed and we need to bisect in
> > future... I've attached a patch for that so that blame for bugs goes my way
> > ;) Compile tested only so far. I'll give it some more testing overnight.
> 
> Great, thanks Jan!  I'll include this in the next posting.
  OK, patch passed xfstests and a test banging one file with random IO and
fsyncs from 8 processes (in data=ordered, data=journal, and nojournal
modes). So it seems I didn't miss anything substantial. So ship it! ;)

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/