The VM and I/O schedulers now expect us to use WRITE_SYNC_PLUG for synchronous
writeout. Right now I can't see any changes in performance numbers with this,
but we're getting some beating for not using it, and the knowledge defintively
could help the block code to make better decisions.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Index: linux-2.6/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c 2009-10-24 10:08:36.622254197
+0200
+++ linux-2.6/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c 2009-10-24 10:18:27.803006347
+0200
@@ -412,8 +412,9 @@ xfs_end_bio(
STATIC void
xfs_submit_ioend_bio(
- xfs_ioend_t *ioend,
- struct bio *bio)
+ struct writeback_control *wbc,
+ xfs_ioend_t *ioend,
+ struct bio *bio)
{
atomic_inc(&ioend->io_remaining);
bio->bi_private = ioend;
@@ -426,7 +427,8 @@ xfs_submit_ioend_bio(
if (xfs_ioend_new_eof(ioend))
xfs_mark_inode_dirty_sync(XFS_I(ioend->io_inode));
- submit_bio(WRITE, bio);
+ submit_bio(wbc->sync_mode == WB_SYNC_ALL ?
+ WRITE_SYNC_PLUG : WRITE, bio);
ASSERT(!bio_flagged(bio, BIO_EOPNOTSUPP));
bio_put(bio);
}
@@ -505,6 +507,7 @@ static inline int bio_add_buffer(struct
*/
STATIC void
xfs_submit_ioend(
+ struct writeback_control *wbc,
xfs_ioend_t *ioend)
{
xfs_ioend_t *head = ioend;
@@ -533,19 +536,19 @@ xfs_submit_ioend(
retry:
bio = xfs_alloc_ioend_bio(bh);
} else if (bh->b_blocknr != lastblock + 1) {
- xfs_submit_ioend_bio(ioend, bio);
+ xfs_submit_ioend_bio(wbc, ioend, bio);
goto retry;
}
if (bio_add_buffer(bio, bh) != bh->b_size) {
- xfs_submit_ioend_bio(ioend, bio);
+ xfs_submit_ioend_bio(wbc, ioend, bio);
goto retry;
}
lastblock = bh->b_blocknr;
}
if (bio)
- xfs_submit_ioend_bio(ioend, bio);
+ xfs_submit_ioend_bio(wbc, ioend, bio);
xfs_finish_ioend(ioend, 0);
} while ((ioend = next) != NULL);
}
@@ -1198,7 +1201,7 @@ xfs_page_state_convert(
}
if (iohead)
- xfs_submit_ioend(iohead);
+ xfs_submit_ioend(wbc, iohead);
return page_dirty;
|