| To: | Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Device loses barrier support (was: Fixed patch for simple barriers.) |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 4 Dec 2008 12:53:07 -0500 |
| Cc: | Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andi Kleen <andi-suse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Alasdair G Kergon <agk@xxxxxxxxxx>, Milan Broz <mbroz@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20081204174838.GS6703@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.64.0812040009340.15169@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20081204100050.GN6703@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0812040836480.6118@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20081204142015.GQ6703@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0812040913510.6118@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20081204145810.GR6703@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0812041139200.2434@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20081204174838.GS6703@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 06:48:38PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > I think. Just the low level xfs_buf interface happens to use the asynchronous > callbacks instead of calling into the block layer directly like jbd et.al. > do. Only delwri buffers are delayed in XFS, but the journaling code only uses async buffers which *synchronously* call into the block layer, but just don't wait for it to complete.. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Device loses barrier support (was: Fixed patch for simple barriers.), Andi Kleen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Device loses barrier support (was: Fixed patch for simple barriers.), Mikulas Patocka |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Device loses barrier support (was: Fixed patch for simple barriers.), Andi Kleen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Device loses barrier support (was: Fixed patch for simple barriers.), Mikulas Patocka |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |