| To: | Jens Axboe <jaxboe@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [xfs-masters] linux-next: manual merge of the xfs tree with Linus' tree |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 28 Mar 2011 13:00:40 +0200 |
| Cc: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, David Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx" <xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-next@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-next@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <4D9069C1.4080602@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20110328122148.1b48a742.sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110328104753.GA27327@xxxxxx> <20110328105348.GA27458@xxxxxx> <4D9069C1.4080602@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) |
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 12:58:09PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > Yes, in fact all of the blk_flush_plug() calls in XFS can just go away > now. I tried to keep them for clarity, but they are primarily there > since XFS was the first conversion/testing I did back when it was hacked > up. It seems like the xfsbufd can go away, too indeed. If we have more work to do it makes sense not to plug, and if we don't have more work we are going to sleep. I think the one in xfs_flush_buftarg actually does make sense to keep - we really want to flush out all pending I/O before waiting for it. But I guess for both of these we just want to add an explicit plug/unlug pair to optimize the I/O dispatch. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [xfs-masters] linux-next: manual merge of the xfs tree with Linus' tree, Jens Axboe |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re-Validate Your Mailbox Now!!!, System Administrator |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [xfs-masters] linux-next: manual merge of the xfs tree with Linus' tree, Jens Axboe |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [xfs-masters] linux-next: manual merge of the xfs tree with Linus' tree, Alex Elder |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |