On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 10:43:38PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 09:03:03AM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > Regression introduced by recent freezing fixes - we should
> > not hold the ilock while waiting for I/O completion.
> Looks good, and actually simplies the twisted maze the xfs_sync_inodes is
> a little bit. And the missing IPOINTER_INSERT in the SYNC_CLOSE case
> looks like an actual bugfix.
I had to look closely at that IPOINTER_INSERT case with SYNC_CLOSE;
it was actaully working properly because you'd always end up in
the SYNC_CLOSE case having inserted a pointer earlier on in the flow
of the function. It certainly wasn't obvious that it was doing the
right thing, though.
> Of course in the end I'd still like to see all pagecache-writeout to
> be driven by sync_sb_inodes() instead of the fs code, but it'll probably
> take a little longer until that is done.
Agreed on both counts.
SGI Australian Software Group