On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 09:49 -0700, Chandra Seetharaman wrote:
> Hi Alex,
> Does this look fine ?
Yes. But it's small enough that I think you should just
include this change with another change (especially if you
decide to drop the "sync" flag from this function as I
> @@ -1568,18 +1568,14 @@ xfs_fs_writable(xfs_mount_t *mp)
> * xfs_log_sbcount
> - * Called either periodically to keep the on disk superblock values
> - * roughly up to date or from unmount to make sure the values are
> - * correct on a clean unmount.
> + * Sync the superblock counters to disk.
> * Note this code can be called during the process of freezing, so
> - * we may need to use the transaction allocator which does not not
> + * we may need to use the transaction allocator which does not
> * block when the transaction subsystem is in its frozen state.