| To: | Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 2/3] ext4: honor the O_SYNC flag for aysnchronous direct I/O requests |
| From: | Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 6 Feb 2012 17:58:36 +0100 |
| Cc: | Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <x49bopcq6gi.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <1327698949-12616-1-git-send-email-jmoyer@xxxxxxxxxx> <1327698949-12616-3-git-send-email-jmoyer@xxxxxxxxxx> <20120202173120.GA6640@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <x49bopcq6gi.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) |
On Mon 06-02-12 11:20:29, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> writes:
>
> >> + /* workqueue for aio+dio+o_sync disk cache flushing */
> >> + struct workqueue_struct *aio_dio_flush_wq;
> >> +
> > Hmm, looking at the patch I'm wondering why did you introduce the new
> > workqueue? It seems dio_unwritten_wq would be enough? You just need to
> > rename it to something more appropriate ;)
>
> I used a new workqueue as the operations are blocking, and I didn't want
> to hold up other progress. If you think re-using the unwritten_wq is
> the right thing to do, I'm happy to comply.
Ah, ok. Thinking about it, it's probably better to use a separate work
queue then.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 3/3] filemap: don't call generic_write_sync for -EIOCBQUEUED, Jeff Moyer |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] xfsdump: use the full 32-bit generation number, Bill Kendall |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 2/3] ext4: honor the O_SYNC flag for aysnchronous direct I/O requests, Jeff Moyer |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 2/3] ext4: honor the O_SYNC flag for aysnchronous direct I/O requests, Jeff Moyer |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |